
















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































V 
























MEMOIRS 


OF 

SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR 


BART., OF ULBSTER. 

























MEMOIRS 


OF 


SIB GEORGE SINCLAIR, 

BART., OF ULBSTER, 


/ 

By JAMES GRANT, 

• I 

AUTHOR OF “ THE GREAT METROPOLIS/’ “ THE RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES 

OF THE TIMES,” ETC., ETC. 



LONDON: 

TINSLEY BROTHERS, 18, CATHERINE STREET, STRAND. 

1870. 

. is 

[Right of Translation Reserved.} 



Hf{S5/o 


LONDON; 

BRADBruy, EVAN'S, AND CO., PRINTERS, WHITEFRIAR3. 


• • * 


In responding to the application made to me to write 
the Biography of Sir George Sinclair, I felt that, if I 
was at all fitted for the task, my qualification consisted 
chiefly in having a more intimate knowledge of his inner 
life than was, perhaps, possessed by any one else outside 
the members of his own family. It was my great 
privilege for a long period, not only to have carried on 
an intimate correspondence with Sir George, but, during 
his several years’ winter residence at Norwood with his 
son and daughter-in-law, now Sir Tollemache and Lady 
Sinclair, to have spent much time in his delightful 
society. To this qualification for writing the Life of 
Sir George Sinclair there was added another, namely, 
that, extensive as was the circle of his friends, there 
was not one among the number who entertained a higher 


personal esteem for him. Nor could any one have had 
a more exalted appreciation of his intellectual attain¬ 
ments, or warmer admiration of his moral and religious 
worth, than he who has penned those “Memoirs” of 
Sir George which are now in the hands of the reader. 

It will be in the remembrance of many of those whose 
eyes glance over this Preface, that, at the banquet given 
to Mr. Disraeli in Edinburgh, in October, 18G7—the 


VI 


PREFACE. 


greatest banquet, I believe, ever given in Scotland 
to any public man—the Right Hon. gentleman, in 
expressing his gratification at witnessing the magnificent 
assemblage met to do him honour, mingled with it the 
expression of his regret at the absence, caused by ill- 
health, of his friend, Sir George Sinclair. <£ I miss 
to-day,” said Mr. Disraeli, “the presence of one of my 
oldest friends, and should have liked to have been 
welcomed by his cordial heart, and by that ripe scholar¬ 
ship wdiich no one appreciated more than myself.” The 
beautiful blending of the “ cordial heart ” with the high 
order of intellectual culture to which Mr. Disraeli, then 
a Cabinet Minister, so felicitously referred, were qualities 
in the character of the subject of these “Memoirs,” 
which were more or less fully unfolded in every step 
which he took along the pathway of life. It has been 
my object in this Volume to bring out to the best or 
my ability those noble intellectual qualities which, in 
so marked a manner, were in happy association with 
the moral and religious character of Sir George. Such 
a nature, and such a career as his, ought to be held 
up to the admiration, not of those of the present day 
only, but to that of generations yet unborn, in order that 
we all may, by imitating his bright and benevolent 
example, prove a source of benefit and blessing to 
mankind. 

London, 

January , 1870 . 


CONTENTS. 


♦ 


CHAPTER I. 

PAGE 

Birth, of Mr. Sinclair—Notices of his Ancestors—Is sent to Harrow—His 
great and varied Acquirements—His Popularity among his School 
Companions—His Intimacy with Lord Byron—Lord Byron’s Opinion 
of Mr. Sinclair as expressed in a Letter to Mr. Moore —Lord Byron’s 
Mother. 1 

CHAPTER II. 

Leaves Harrow—The Rev. Dr. Drury, Head Master—Goes to the Uni¬ 
versity of Gottingen—Is taken Prisoner by the French—Is brought 
before and examined by Napoleon the Great—Suspicion of being a 
Prussian Spy—His Narrative of the Incidents which then occurred 
—Remarks and Reflections Fifty-five Years afterwards on the Con¬ 
duct of Modern Prussia in connection with the Emperor of the 
French—Visits the Court of Prussia—Dines with the King—An In¬ 
cident at Dinner —The English Language.18 

CHAPTER III. 

Return to England—His Election as Member of Parliament for Caith¬ 
ness—His debut as a Speaker in the House of Commons—His Marriage 
with Miss Camilla Manners, Daughter of Sir William Manners—Se¬ 
cond Tour to the Continent—Intimacy with Mr. Joseph Hume— 
Letters from the Latter.44 

CHAPTER IY. 

Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair’s Intimacy and Correspondence with German Prin¬ 
cesses—The Queen’s “Early Years of the Prince Consort”—Letters 
from the Duchess of Saxe-Coburg, Prince Albert’s Mother, to Mrs. 
Sinclair—Letters from the Duchess of Clarence to Mrs. Sinclair . 80 




Vlll 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER V. 

PAGE 

Intimacy with his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence, afterwards 
William the Fourth—Letter from Mr. Sinclair to the Duke—Letter to 
Lord Liverpool—Letters from his Royal Highness to Mr. Sinclair . 


CHAPTER VI. 

Mr. Sinclair’s Speeches in Parliament—His Scientific Pursuits—Literary 
Efforts and Poetic tastes—Early Aristocratic Friends—The Duke 
of Gordon—The Duchess of Gordon and Mr. Pitt-Lord Fife—Lord 
Glenelg—Lord Ward 


CHAPTER VII. 

Mr. Sinclair’s Christian Character—His Religious Friends and Corres¬ 
pondents—Letters from Viscount and Viscountess Mandeville, after¬ 
wards Duke and Duchess of Manchester—Letters from Lord Roden . l->0 


CHAPTER VIII. 

Correspondence with Prelates and the Clergy of the Church of Eng¬ 
land—Letter from Mr. Sinclair to the Archbishop of Canterbury— 
Letter to the Archbishop of Armagh—Letters from the late Dr. 
Phillpotts, Bishop of Exeter, and from Dr. Blomfield, formerly 
Bishop of London—Letters from the Rev. Charles Simeon and the 
Rev. Dr. Croly,.108 


CHAPTER IX. 

Mr. Sinclair’s Friendship with Sir Francis Burdett—Letters of the 
Latter to the Former—Mr. John Wilson Croker and the Quarterly 
Review—Mr. Croker’s Correspondence with Mr. Sinclair . . .11)2 


CHAPTER X. 

The year 1880—Sir George Sinclair’s Friendship for Charles the Tenth 
of France—His Sympathy with the Royal Exile—Letter to the Count 
de Chambord, or Due de Bordeaux, on the State of Affairs in France— 
Interview with Charles the Tenth—The deep Interest Sir George 
took in the Misfortunes of the Royal Exile—General Observations , 229 


CONTENTS. 


IX 


CHAPTER XI. 

PAGE 

Elevation of the Duke of Clarence to the Throne—Incident at Bushey 
House—Mr. Sinclair’s Intimacy with his Royal Highness as King 
— Refuses an Invitation to Dine with his Majesty on a Sunday— 
Letter to the King stating the grounds of his Refusal—Letter on 
the State of the Country.240 


CHAPTER XII. 

The Part which Sir George Sinclair took in the Scottish Non-Intrusion 
Question—His Letter to Lord Aberdeen on the Subject—Is Assailed 
for Remaining in the National Church after the Disruption—Ulti¬ 
mately joins the Free Church of Scotland—Suggests and advocates 
a Union between the Free Church and United Presbyterians . . 207 


CHAPTER XIII. 

Sir George joins, in 1835, the New Party of Lord Stanley and Sir James 
Graham—His Reasons for taking that Step, as given by Himself— 

His Last Speeches in the House of Commons, before Retiring from 
Parliament—His Reasons for Retiring.202 


CHAPTER XIV. 

Correspondence with Peers of the Realm—The late Duke of Sutherland 
—Letters from the Duke to Sir George Sinclair—Letters to Sir 
George Sinclair from the late Duke of Newcastle—The late Duke 
of Manchester—The Duke of Argyll—The late Marquis of Nor- 
manby—The late Earl of Derby—The late Lord Lyndhurst—The 
late Lord Brougham—The late Lord Ashburton ..... 300 


CHAPTER XY. 

Letters from Members of the House of Commons—Letter from Sir James 
Mackintosh to Lady Camilla Sinclair—Letter to Sir George Sinclair 
from the late William Wilberforce—The late Sir Robert Peel—Sir 
Robert Inglis—Sir James Graham—Mr. Disraeli .... 354 


CHAPTER XYI. 


Letters from M. Berryer—M. Victor Schoelcher—Mr. Carlyle—Mrs. Carlyle, 

and other Friends with whom Sir George Sinclair corresponded . 379 


X 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER XVII. 

PAGE 

Literary Labours of Sir George Sinclair—Travels in Germany in Two 
Volumes—Various Works on Political and Religious Subjects—Writ¬ 
ings for the Newspaper Press—Letters to the Protestants of Scot¬ 
land—Poetry.432 


CHAPTER XVIII. 

Sir George Sinclair at Home—Letters to bis Daughter—His Labours 

amor.g the Poor—Dr. Turnbull—Miscellaneous Remarks . . . 45G 


CHAPTER XIX. 

Break-down in Sir George Sinclair’s Health—His Visit to Cannes in the 
Hope of its Restoration—Return to his own Country—His Continued 
Illness—His Death and Funeral—Lines on his Death . . .472 


CHAPTER XX. 


Thurso Castle—Harold's Tower—Tribute to the Memory of Sir George 

Sinclair—His Successor in the Title and Estates . . . .477 



MEMOIRS 


OP 

SIB GEORGE SINCLAIR, Babt. 


CHAPTER I. 

Birtli of Mr. Sinclair—Notices of his Ancestors—He is sent to Harrow—His great 
anil varied Acquirements —His Popularity among his School Companions— 
His Intimacy with Lord Byron—Lord Byron’s Opinion of Mr. Sinclair a3 
expressed in a Letter to Mr. Moore —Lord Byron’s Mother. 

George Sinclair, the subject of these Memoirs, was 
bom on the 28th of August, 1790. His birth took place 
in the Canongate, Edinburgh, in the house of his grand¬ 
mother, Lady Janet Sinclair. He was the eldest son of 
the Right Hon. Sir John Sinclair, Bart., and of the Hon. 
Diana Macdonald, only daughter of Alexander, first Lord 
Macdonald. He was descended from a family of great 
antiquity and high position in Scotland. They originally 
came from Normandy, as the surname Sinclair indicates. 
One of the villages in Normandy still bears the name of 
St. Clair, or de Sancto Claro, which was the name from 
which that of Sinclair was derived. The first of the 
Sinclair family of whom we have any specific information, 
was William de Sancto Claro. David the First, King of 
Scotland, who occupies a prominent place in Scottish 





2 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

history, because of the numerous monasteries which he 
founded, introduced a number of Norman settlers into 
Scotland, and granted to William de Sane to the manoi 
of Roslin, near Edinburgh. The precise year in which 
this took place cannot now be ascertained, but it was early 
in the twelfth century. From William de Sancto Claro, 
who may be regarded as the founder of the family in 
Scotland, was descended Sir William, who having married 
one of the co-heiresses of Malise, Earl of Strathern, Caith¬ 
ness, and Orkney,—brought the last of these titles into the 
St. Clair, afterwards Sinclair, family. Those who would 
wish to trace the intermediate history of the Sinclair 
family down to the beginning of the seventeenth century, 
will find some curious information on the subject, in the 
“ Memoirs of the Life and Works of Sir John Sinclair, 
Bart.,” by his son, the Venerable Archdeacon of Middle¬ 
sex. In 1596 and 1603, George, the fifth earl of Caith¬ 
ness, conveyed the lands of Ulbster to Patrick Sinclair. 
In both these grants the latter is designated by the Earl 
of Caithness as his cousin. From that time till now the 
ancestors of the subject of this volume have been distin¬ 
guished from other branches of the Sinclair family, by 
beino; designated as the Sinclairs of Ulbster: and the 
chief of the family is described as Bart, of Fibster. 

The Sinclairs of Ulbster have for the last two centuries 
and a half formed matrimonial alliances with the highest 
families in the North of Scotland. John Sinclair, the 
great-grandfather of the subject of these Memoirs, married 
in 1714 Henrietta Brodie, sister to the Lord Lyon of 
Scotland—a name which occupies a prominent place in 
the annals of the early part of last century. George, 
the eldest son of John, and grandfather of him whose 



NOTICES OF HIS ANCESTORS. 


3 


career constitutes the subject of this work, was educated 
at the private academy at Stoke Newington, kept by the 
celebrated Dr. Isaac Watts. Dr. Watts seems to have 
cherished a special friendship for his pupil; for on 
hearing of the death of the father of the latter, while 
the latter was at Utrecht, Dr. Watts wrote a long and 
affectionate letter to him, impressing on him with great 
earnestness the importance, now that he was heir to large 
estates, and about to fill a distinguished position in society, 
of continuing to cultivate those “ Christian virtues which 
had bloomed in his early years.” 

“ In the early part of life,” says Dr. Watts, “ we are apt to 
be too sensibly impressed with the ridicule of the world. We 
are afraid and ashamed to run counter to the fashions of the 
age, be they ever so vicious. May the grace of God defend 
your heart with genuine courage, and guard you against all 
such weakness. May the books of the New Testament, the 
Psalms of David, and the wise Proverbs of Solomon his son, 
be the rules of your conduct, the assistants of your devotion, 
and the life of your spirit. May the providence of God guide 
and determine all your affairs for you. ‘ In all thy ways ac¬ 
knowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths,’ Prov. iii. 6. I 
shall always be glad to hear of your advancement in wisdom 
and happiness. May your present behaviour in the world make 
it appear that youth and piety are no strangers to each other, 
and in your following years of life may you be an ornament to 
our religion, and an honour to your native country. Grace and 
peace be with you ! ” 

Archdeacon Sinclair most justly says, in quoting, in 
the Life of his Father, this letter of counsel and friendship 
from Dr. Isaac Watts, that the letter was equally worthy 
of Dr. Watts, and honourable to his pupil. It will be 
gratifying to those who revere the memory of the author 
of that volume of hymns which is universally sung in the 

B 2 


4 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


churches and chapels of all our religious denominations, 
throughout the whole realm of evangelical Christendom, 
to be informed that this pupil of Dr. Watts, as stated by 
Archdeacon Sinclair, “ retained the sentiments of consis¬ 
tent piety, the seeds of which in early life had been 
implanted by Dr. Watts,” elsewhere called “ the venerable 
instructor ” of the youthful George Sinclair,—the arch¬ 
deacon’s grandfather. This George Sinclair, after making 
a tour on the Continent in company with the Earl of 
Sandwich—afterwards First Lord of the Admiralty,—• 
Lord President Dundas, and other distinguished cha¬ 
racters of that day, returned to Scotland, and soon 
afterwards married Lady Janet Sutherland, daughter of 
William, Lord Strathnaven, who would have been the 
seventeenth Earl of Sutherland had he outlived his 
father. The chief of the Sutherland family did not at 
that time possess a dukedom. It will be seen that the 
Sinclair family became at this time, through the marriage 
of the grandfather of the subject of these Memoirs, inti¬ 
mately connected with the Sutherland family. 

Lady Janet Sinclair, grandmother of him to whose bio¬ 
graphy this volume is devoted, was a handsome woman, 
of highly cultivated intellect, great natural shrewdness, 
and remarkable for her business habits and energy of 
character. She was withal somewhat eccentric; and 
Archdeacon Sinclair, her grandson, attributes certain 
eccentricities in the character of her son, his father, 
Sir John Sinclair, to having been brought up chiefly 
under her guardianship. 

Archdeacon Sinclair, in the memoirs of his father, to 
which I have made more than one reference, records some 
of the eccentricities of his grandmother, Lady Janet. “ I 





NOTICES OF IIIS ANCESTORS. 


5 


have already,” says the Archdeacon, “ mentioned the 
popularity of Lady Janet with her dependents. Their 
confidence in her regard for them was not misplaced. 
On some points, especially of matrimony, it extended to 
a degree which we might pronounce divertingly eccentric. 
She was sensitively anxious that each of her female 
domestics should find a suitable husband and protector. 
On one occasion, during a serious illness, being under 
some alarm for her own fife, she gave her maid some 
salutary advice ; and, among other admonitions, pressed 
upon her the necessity of being married. The young 
woman, no doubt astonished at the introduction of such 
a subject, confessed that she had already entered into an 
engagement of the kind, but was prevented from com¬ 
pleting it by 4 a little hindrance.' 4 And what is that ?' 
said her mistress. 4 Only just, my Leddy, that the man 
is married already, and his wife is not dead yet; but they 
tell me she is dying.' Lady Janet was satisfied, and 
expressed the comfort she had received from this inte¬ 
resting communication. 

44 Notwithstanding eccentricities of this kind, which, I 
may observe, had generally a benevolent tendency, some 
idea of the respect which this really superior woman 
inspired among her northern neighbours, may be gathered 
from another story which she sometimes related. She 
happened to be directress of an assembly given at Edin¬ 
burgh, while the General Assembly of the Kirk of 
Scotland held their session. A simple-minded gentleman 
in the north, no doubt as little conversant with ecclesias¬ 
tical affairs as with the nature of the fashionable meeting 
over which her ladyship was to preside, addressed a letter 
of business to 4 The Eight Hon. Lady Janet Sinclair, 


G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Moderator of the General Assembly, Canongate, Edin¬ 
burgh/ This simple correspondent did not mistake in 
supposing that her ladyship took real interest in the 
welfare of the Scottish establishment, and the efficiency 
of its ministers. 

“ The autograph is now before me of her letter to a 
young clergyman, Mr. Nicholson, whom her son had 
recently appointed to the parochial charge of Thurso. 
It is characterised by a deep sense of the responsibilities 
belonging both to patron and incumbent.” 

But notwithstanding certain oddities in Lady Janet 
Sinclair, she was an eminent Christian, as will appear 
from the following letter to her son, the late Sir John 
Sinclair, father of the subject of this biography. I am 
sure that when my readers have perused it, and consider 
the circumstances under which it was written, they will 
concur with me in the opinion, that one might in vain 
range through the wide domain of female biography in 
their search for an exemplification of Christian philosophy 
which would surpass it. She had almost attained the 
allotted period—threescore years and ten—of human life, 
and was in the hourly expectation of death, when she 
penned this letter to her son. 

LADY JANET SINCLAIR TO JOHN SINCLAIR, ESQ. 

MY DEAR SON, 

Before this can be delivered to you, I shall have bid a 
final adieu to this vain world, to all its concerns, and all my 
connexions in it. The death of an affectionate parent will 
naturally affect a son of your sensibility. I earnestly pray 
Almighty God to grant his choicest blessings on you, my dear 
son, your amiable wife, and promising children. May you 
always endeavour to serve God faithfully, and to worship him 
with reverence ; may religion and virtue be the rule of all your 



NOTICES OF IIIS ANCESTORS. 


7 


actions • and suffer not the temptations or allurements of a 
vain world to make you swerve from your duty. My settle¬ 
ment, of date 1776, which will accompany this, will give a 
striking proof of my attachment to you and yours. May the 
blessing of God accompany it. Your sisters I recommend to 
your affectionate attention. I hope they will merit it. Mrs. 
Campbell has a large family, which she will find it difficult to 
educate and provide for. Mrs. Rigg is happily married to a 
good husband, and is in great affluence. My dear Jessy is 
happy under your and Mrs. Sinclair’s protection. I hope you 
will be a father to them all. As to your own concerns, I en¬ 
treat you to observe economy, and beware of impositions. Re¬ 
side as much in Caithness as possible ; and do not trust too 
much to the management of others in the conducting of your 
affairs. You’ll find few to trust. Self-interest with some, 
popularity with others, you’ll have to encounter. Even my 
long experience was not proof against their arts. Keep short 
accounts with those you employ in every capacity, and do as 
much of your own business and affairs as possible yourself. I 
don’t approve of setting large “ tacks-farms” to tacksmen. 
They often oppress the poor people under them. To be in 
debt is a most disagreeable situation to be placed in. To con¬ 
tract it is easy, but how difficult to repay! It lessens one’s 
importance, chagrins the temper, and ruins a family. Beware 
of cautionary and engagements for others. I have had a 
variety of trials and afflictions in life, with malice unprovoked, 
disrespect, and indifference. These I did not merit or resent, 
and I now forgive. 

Adieu, my dearest son, till we meet in another world, as I 
trust, in the mercy of God, and through the merits of an all- 
sufficient Saviour, that we shall meet in a state of bliss and 
endless happiness, where the wicked cease from troubling, 
and where the weary are at rest. May you and yours be 
happy. God bless all my dear children, prays your affectionate 
mother, 

Janet Sinclair. 

The name of Sir John Sinclair, father of Mr. Sinclair, 
who on his death succeeded to the title and the estates of 


8 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Ulbster, was for nearly half a century one of the best 
known in all Scotland. It was, indeed, a household word. 
There was scarcely a peasant north of the Tweed to 
whose ears the name of Sir John was not familiar. And 
he well deserved the celebrity he enjoyed, for he was, 
indeed, a benefactor to his country. He had recourse to 
every available method of spreading useful intelligence 
through all parts of the land, and urged on his country¬ 
men the adoption of every means within their reach for 
improving the various branches of industry which during 
his day were common in Scotland. The promotion of 
agriculture was an object especially dear to his heart, 
and probably there is not an instance on record, in the 
history of any nation, in which one individual did more for 
his country, with respect to material improvements, than 
Sir John Sinclair did for Scotland. He was a voluminous 
author, and on various subjects, especially of a financial 
and statistical nature. His “ Statistical Account of Scot¬ 
land/’ a work of great merit and still holding a prominent 
place in the country to which it relates, extends to no 
fewer than twenty-one volumes. The mass of informa¬ 
tion it contains is amazing, and never could have been 
collected but by a man of wonderful energy. 

Sir John Sinclair was personally acquainted with 
nearly all the leading men of the latter half of the last 
century and the early part of the present. There was 
not, indeed, a statesman of eminence at that period of our 
history with whom he was not acquainted. With most of 
them he was on terms of more than ordinary friendship. 
William Pitt had a high regard for him, and, when Prime 
Minister, consulted him on some of his great financial 
schemes. Having been contemporaneously with Pitt 


NOTICES OF IIIS ANCESTORS. 


9 


thirty years in parliament, he had constant opportunities 
of cultivating a close intimacy with the Prime Minister 
of that period. It was, indeed, William Pitt that con¬ 
ferred a baronetcy upon him. Mr. Pitt had great confi¬ 
dence in Sir John Sinclair’s opinions on monetary and 
fiscal questions, and consulted him on several occasions 
when preparing to bring financial measures before the 
House of Commons. His earliest work on financial sub¬ 
jects was entitled “ Hints on the State of our Finances,” 
and exercised a decidedly beneficial influence on the 
condition of our national finances at the period at which 
it appeared. Nor was it without a salutary effect on the 
financial condition of several continental countries, espe¬ 
cially Holland, the statesmen of which latter country 
were forward to admit their obligations to the views on 
national finances which they had been led to adopt from 
the perusal of Sir John’s able and enlightened work on 
the subject. Among the eminent men of our country 
who were struck with the masterly work of Sir John 
Sinclair on the subject of our national finances, was the 
celebrated Dr. Price, the author—or, perhaps, more pro¬ 
perly speaking, the inventor—of the scheme of a sinking 
fund for the extinction of the national debt. 

What the extent of the correspondence of Sir John 
Sinclair must have been during the sixty years which it 
embraced may be inferred from the fact that his biogra¬ 
pher, when he commenced his preparations for writing 
his Memoirs, found that he had to deal with no fewer than 
from 40,000 to 50,000 papers. A somewhat appalling 
sight it must have been to his excellent son and biogra¬ 
pher! Sir John Sinclair died on December 21, in the 
year 1835, and was succeeded in the baronetcy and 



10 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


family estates by his son George, the subject of these 
pages. 

The mother of Mr. Sinclair was the Hon. Diana Mac¬ 
donald, second wife of Sir John Sinclair, and daughter of 
Alexander, first Lord Macdonald. She was remarkable 
alike for her beauty and her lady-like manners. The 
female portion of the Macdonald family were, indeed, 
particularly, as they still are, eminent for their personal 
attractions and aristocratic bearing. Sir John, too, was 
a fine specimen of the gentleman. Probably “ so hand¬ 
some a couple/’ to use a familiar phrase, has seldom been 
seen. On their presentation to George the Third, that 
monarch paid them, in this respect, a very high, and 
from the manner in which he spoke, a doubtless sincere 
compliment. It was to the effect that though he might 
have seen more beautiful women than Lady Sinclair, and 
more handsome men than Sir John, yet that he had 
never seen a more beautiful woman and more handsome 
man united together as husband and wife, than the 
friends before him. 

I have mentioned that George Sinclair, Sir John’s 
eldest son, and the subject of this biographical work, 
was born in the Canongate, Edinburgh, in the house of 
his grandmother, Lady Janet, to whom I have made a 
brief reference. The portrait taken of him when he was 
seven years of age by Raeburn, one of the finest portrait 
painters at the end of the last and the beginning of the 
present century, shows what a beautiful boy he must 
then have been. Probably few men have displayed 
greater precocity as a poet than did Mr. Sinclair. He 
entered Harrow school when only ten years of age, 
and before he was eleven he composed in Latin a 


HIS PRECOCITY AS A POET. 


11 


poem on Human Life, of which the following 
translation :— 


HUMAN LIFE. 

“ The day of life flies fast away, 

A warning that our night is nigh.”— Horace. 

I. 

Boundless and vast the projects of the mind, 

House still to house, and lands to lands are joined, 

As if fruition were all-way, 

And life a sure eternal day. 

II. 

Hark ! Death arrests ! Where now those towering schemes ? 
To nought they sink, as vain illusive dreams. 

What's life ? a flower that charms the sight, 

Whose morning glory dies at night. 

III. 

Why boast of life, that hourly flies away; 

A poor and short reprieve from day to day. 

Yet youth and beauty we adore, 

And of the gods would ask no more. 


iv. 

Ah ! lust impetuous, raging thro’ the veins. 
Black tempests raises of disease and pains. 
We pray the gods to interpose, 

But no relief from rising woes. 


V. 

When death imperious gives the dreadful call, 
The young, the old, his trembling victims fall. 
Nor wealth, nor beauty, can procure 
The least respite—e’en of an hour. 

VI. 

Her beauty gone, but not her vanity, 

Old Dian now must that with art supply. 

A deadly symptom, yet betrays 
The withered proud in deep disguise. 

VII. 

Therefore let us departing life improve, 

And timely check the mad impulse of love. 
And where sage virtue points the way, 
There let us walk, and bless her sway. 


is a 



12 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


These verses were greatly admired by all at the school 
capable of appreciating their merits in one so young. 
They were especially admired and commended by Dr. 
Drury, the head-master. At that still celebrated educa¬ 
tional institution he not only became a great favourite with 
all the scholars because of his amiable manners, but com¬ 
manded universal admiration and respect for his varied 
scholastic attainments. I am speaking of George Sinclair 
when he was only fourteen or fifteen years of age. At that 
early period in his life, he was master of several languages, 
and possessed a store of literary knowledge which but few 
have acquired within two or three years after entering 
their teens. Dr. Drury, head-master, pointed out to the 
other pupils Mr. Sinclair as one whom they ought, both 
intellectually and as a gentleman, to make an object of 
emulation. 

Among those who were his fellow scholars at Harrow 
were several young men who afterwards rose to great 
eminence; some in the political, and others in the lite¬ 
rary world. Among the former was the late Sir Robert 
Peel, and among the latter Lord Byron. Both these 
distinguished persons cherished the warmest friendship 
for their schoolfellow. The friendly feelings which 
young Byron, afterwards Lord Byron, entertained for 
George Sinclair, and his appreciation of young Sinclair’s 
scholastic attainments, are specially noticed in Moore’s 
‘‘Life of Lord Byron.” They were in the same form together. 
In the early part of that work Moore publishes a letter 
from Lord Byron, in which the following passages occur 
in relation to George Sinclair:—“The prodigy of our 
school days was George Sinclair (son of Sir John) ; lie 
made exercises for half the school (literally), verses at 



IIIS INTIMACY WITH LOUD BYRON. 


13 


will, and themes without it. He was a friend of mine, 
and in the same remove, and used at times to beg of me 
to let him do my exercise—a request always most readily 
accorded upon a pinch, or when I wanted to do something 
else, which was usually once an hour. On the other hand 
he was pacific, and I savage ; so I fought for him, or 
thrashed others for him, or thrashed himself to make him 
thrash others, when it was necessary, as a point of honour 
and stature, that he should so chastise; or w T e talked 
politics, for he was a great politician, and were very good 
friends. I have some of his letters, written to me from 
school, still.” 

In another part of Moore’s “ Life of Lord Byron ” there 
is another reference to George Sinclair by the noble poet. 
W riting to a friend of the name of Harness, Lord Byron 
says :—“ How well I recollect the perusal of your ‘ first 
flights/ There is another circumstance you do not know. 
The first lines I ever attempted at Harrow were addressed 
to you. You were to have seen them; but Sinclair had 
the copy in his possession when we went home; and on 
our return we were strangers. They were destroyed.” 

The friendship which subsisted between Lord Byron 
and Mr. George Sinclair may be further inferred from 
the fact, that the noble poet, after reaching his ma¬ 
jority, offered to pay him a visit to Thurso Castle, the 
picturesque residence, in Caithness, of Sir John Sinclair, 
the father of the subject of these Memoirs. Lord Byron, 
however, laid down certain conditions to his paying 
his proposed visit to his friend and fellow student 
at Harrow. The first stipulation he made w r as, that 
he should not be bored by dinners with the neighbours. 
The second was, that a good stock of claret was to be laid 



14 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


in ; and the third, that his “friend Hobhouse,” afterwards 
Sir John Hobhouse, and for the latter twenty years of his 
life Lord Broughton, should be invited to Thurso Castle 
at the same time. As a sort of subsidiary stipulation 
to his paying his own proposed visit to Thurso Castle, 
Lord Byron said that there must be good fishing and a 
rubber of whist. The latter is a thing to be had in every 
family of note in Scotland, as everywhere else, where 
religious scruples do not interdict the use of cards; while 
with regard to the former condition, there are probably 
few places in the world in which there is such excellent 
fishing as at Thurso Castle, for in the adjoining river, 
Thurso, salmon are exceedingly abundant. Mr. Sinclair s 
father, Sir John Sinclair, mentions, in his “ Statistical 
Account of Scotland/’ a draught of salmon in that river, 
which is neither deep nor wide, so great, that I doubt 
whether it was ever paralleled in the annals of salmon 
fishing. There is a well authenticated account of the 
fact, that in July 1744 the extraordinary number of 9,560 
were taken by nets in that small river in one day. But 
Lord Byron’s stipulation that there should be excellent 
angling sport was prospectively complied with, for so near 
was Thurso Castle to the sea, that the spray often entered 
the house, and fish had frequently been caught by the net 
from the drawing-room windows. Immediately after this 
Lord Byron’s sudden marriage took place, and the conse¬ 
quence was, that the visit to Thurso Castle was never 
paid. 

At an after period, though I am unable to mention the 
date, Lord Byron furnished to Mr. Sinclair a personal 
proof of that irascible temper which was one of his cha¬ 
racteristics till the latest term of his life. The specific 


HIS INTIMACY WITH LORD BYRON. 


15 


causes of this display of Byron’s irritable nature are not 
known, but, from his own language, it is clear that it must 
have had its origin in some reference which Mr. Sinclair 
had made to certain squabbles which they had had when 
schoolboys, and which Byron wished to be buried in ob¬ 
livion. As Mr. Sinclair was in his youthful years, as he 
was all through his after life, remarkable for his amiability 
and courtesy, it is difficult to imagine what cause of 
offence he could have given to Byron. It is impossible 
to believe that it could have been such as would justify 
the view which Byron took of it, for he evidently felt 
indignant at the allusion made to him by Mr. Sinclair. 
The tone and terms in which Byron expressed himself 
may be inferred from the fact, that he began his letter 
thus : “ Sir, your reference to such topics shows they are 
not forgotten by you,” &c. How long the estrangement 
lasted between Byron and Mr. Sinclair arising out of this 
misunderstanding, I have not been able to ascertain from 
the voluminous papers put into my hands ; but the pre¬ 
sumption is, that it was not of long duration, for in the 
course of a few years we find them corresponding on the 
same friendly terms as they did before the misunder¬ 
standing occurred. And this friendly correspondence con¬ 
tinued, as far as I can see from the papers relative to the 
life of Mr. Sinclair, until the death of Lord Byron. 

As everything new which relates to Lord Byron is read 
with the greatest interest, when from time to time brought 
before the public, I will, I am sure, be pardoned if I step 
aside for a moment from the current of my biography to 
mention one or two incidents which occurred in Byron’s 
early life, and which have not yet been published. I am 
indebted for them to a well-written biographical sketch of 


1G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Sir George Sinclair by Mr. Alexander Sinclair, the brother 
of Sir George, and only printed for private circulation, 
after the death of the latter, among those who were his 
private friends. Moore, in his “ Life of Byron,” mentions 
the fact, that, in the year 1796, Byron, when in the eighth 
year of his age, lived with his mother at Banff, a small 
town containing a population at that time of rather more 
than 4,000 souls, and nearly forty miles beyond Aberdeen. 
The circumstance of some of Mrs. Byron s near relatives 
residing there at the time was probably the reason why 
she chose that locality for her abode. One of Byron’s two 
chief companions at this early period of his life was Lord 
Alexander Gordon, son of “Jean Maxwell ”—probably one 
of the greatest beauties of the day—afterwards Duchess of 
Gordon. The other constant companion of young Byron 
was Bobert Abercromby, afterwards Sir Robert. Young 
Abercromby was living with his mother, afterwards Lady 
Abercromby, at the time in the neighbourhood of Banff. 
Sir Robert told Mr. A. Sinclair that he had on more than 
one occasion to interfere, at the risk of his life, between 
Byron and Alexander when they were fighting, and that 
in one case they even fought with knives. Sir Robert 
Abercromby also told Mr. Alexander Sinclair the fol¬ 
lowing interesting incidents connected with Byron’s 
boyish history:— 

Mrs. Byron sadly spoilt her son. One day Mrs. Abercromby, 
who was constantly with her, said to her, “Now, Mrs. Byron, if 
you don’t punish your son, not for the fault he committed, but 
for telling a lie to screen himself, I declare I will do it myself.” 
On this Mrs. Byron got up, and seized her son, and, after a 
struggle, she administered a sort of chastisement. When she 
let him down, he marched deliberately to where Mrs. Aber¬ 
cromby was sitting, and, when he got near, he struck her a blow 



LORD BYRON’S MOTHER. 


17 


on the face with his fist, exclaiming, “ There, that’s for you ; if 
it had not been for you, my mother would never have dared to 
beat me.” Years afterwards, when Sir Robert Abercromby was 
in Parliament for Banffshire, he was one day behind the throne 
when a striking looking youth came up and asked, “Is your 
name Abercromby ? ” He said it was. He then added, “ I 
suppose you don’t know me.” But he had looked down at his 
feet, and replied, “Oh, yes! I know you ; you are Lord Byron.” 
He then asked, “ How is your mother % I very well remember 
the beating she made my mother give me ; but tell her from 
me, it would have been well for me if they had been many 
more.” 

This latter observation by Byron after he had reached 
the years of maturity shows that, with all his irritability 
and all the other objectionable qualities which were to be 
found in his character, there was not a little of what the 
poet calls “the soul of goodness” in him; and had his ma¬ 
ternal training, in the absence of paternal tuition and 
discipline, been different from what it was, his future 
course in life might also have been very different from 
what it unfortunately turned out to be. 


c 


CHAPTER II. 


Leaves Harrow—The Rev. Dr. Drury, Head Master—Goes to the University of 
Gottingen—Is taken Prisoner by the French—Is brought before and ex¬ 
amined by Napoleon the Great—Suspicion of being a Prussian Spy His 
Narrative of the Incidents which then occurred—Remarks and Reflections 
Fifty-five Years afterwards on the Conduct of modem Prussia in connection 
with the Emperor of the French—Visits the Court of Prussia—Dines with 
the King—An Incident at Dinner—The English Language. 

George Sinclair, as I have stated in the previous 
chapter, was a great favourite at Harrow both with the 
masters and the pupils. He was an especial favourite 
with the Rev. Dr. Drury, then, as before mentioned, the 
head master at that celebrated school. Dr. Drury early 
saw that Sinclair was a young man of an exceedingly 
delicate sensibility, and when he knew that he was 
soon to cpiit the school to proceed to the university of 
Gottingen—at that time one of the most celebrated 
scholastic institutions in Germany—he warned him with 
all the earnestness of a parent not to give way to it, 
because if he did, it would not only interpose obstacles 
to his success in the world, but seriously impair his 
happiness in the private relations of life. 

At the age of sixteen young Sinclair quitted Harrow 
and went to Gottingen, to finish his education at 
that place. He had not been long in Gottingen 
before he formed an intimate acquaintance with some 
of the higher classes of society both in Austria and 



INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 19 

Hungary. By men of condition in the German empire 
he was highly esteemed, and, though then a mere youth, 
his acquaintance was eagerly sought by learned men be¬ 
cause of his great and varied literary attainments. Though 
Latin was at first the medium through which he carried 
on his intercourse with the German literati with whom he 
came into contact, he had not been long in Gottingen 
before he had made so much proficiency in the language 
of the country, as to be able to converse with ease and 
accuracy in it. His aptitude, indeed, for acquiring a 
knowledge of languages was so great that before he had 
attained his thirtieth year he was thoroughly master of 
seven foreign languages, in several of which he could not 
only converse with the greatest ease and propriety, but 
could write with an accuracy which natives of the 
respective countries could hardly surpass. 

During Mr. Sinclair’s stay in Germany, several inci¬ 
dents, personally interesting to him, occurred; but there 
was one of great historical interest. In the campaign of 
1806 the Prussian army had seized all the horses they 
could appropriate for transporting their troops, with a 
view the more effectually to repel the invasion of the 
French army, which was every moment expected. The 
result was that no horses were to be had for ordinary pur¬ 
poses. Mr. Sinclair and a German clergyman who was tra¬ 
velling with him consequently found it necessary to have 
their luggage conveyed along with themselves, in a 
wheel-barrow. Neither of the two youthful travellers— 
nor, indeed, even the Prussians themselves—had the 
slightest idea that the French army had already 
entered the country. Railways and telegrams were 
at that time equally unknown. The two travellers 


20 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

were seized as spies of the Prussian Guard, without 
themselves knowing why or wherefore. They were both 
brought before Murat, at that time the right hand man of 
Napoleon the First, or Napoleon the Great, in contradis¬ 
tinction to the Napoleon who now occupies the Tuileries. 
So far as Murat himself was concerned, he was perfectly 
satisfied with their own statement as to who they were, 
and on what errand they were proceeding, but he said it 
was necessary that he should send them to be re- 
examined by the Emperor. With that view Mr. Sinclair 
and his clerical German companion were committed to 
the care of Count Frohberg. Their re-examination was 
appointed to take place at an hour beyond midnight. 
The night was exceedingly cold as well as damp ; and one 
natural effect of the lowness of the temperature was that 
both the young prisoners shivered from the cold. Count 
Frohberg, on seeing this, and assuming that the trembling 
which he witnessed was from fear, said to them, “You 
needn’t be afraid; the Emperor won’t eat you ! ” 

But as Mr. Sinclair afterwards printed for private 
circulation an account of this interview, held under such 
interesting circumstances, with the first Napoleon, I 
subjoin, without abridgment, his own narrative of the 
incidents connected with an interview with a man 
at the very mention of whose name the proudest and 
most powerful monarch of Europe quailed, and at the 
very idea of whose efforts to obtain universal empire 
all the nations of the European World were filled 
with fear and trembling. As the account which Mr. 
Sinclair gave of the circumstances connected with his 
arrest by the French has never been published, though 
printed for the gratification of a few of his private 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


21 


friends, I have the pleasure of laying the narrative, which 
is of great historic interest, before the public. 

MR. SINCLAIR’S INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 

Circumstances of a private, but urgent, nature, induced me 
to undertake a journey from Gotha to Leipsic, in the beginning 
of October 1806. I prevailed upon my friend Mr. Regel, one 
of the clergymen of the former place, to accompany me. Our 
passport being signed by the Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar, 
whose division of the Prussian troops was then at Gotha, we set 
out, notwithstanding the recent declaration of war; and, in 
despite of some difficulties, passed through Erfurt and Weimar, 
and arrived at Jena, where, at that time, the Prince of Hohen- 
lohe had established his head-quarters. All the horses in 
that neighbourhood had been put in requisition for the use 
of the Army; but, after some delay, we obtained, as a great 
favour, a pair, which conveyed us as far as Schon Gleina, an 
estate belonging to my friend, the then reigning Duke of 
Saxe-Gotha. Here we found a Saxon detachment quartered, 
and were disappointed in our expectation of procuring horses 
to advance us on our journey. We were, however, hospitably 
entertained by the Duke’s steward, and passed the night 
there. 

On the following- morning, we heard a cannonade at some 
distance; and the steward rode to a neighbouring village, with 
a view of ascertaining the cause. He brought us word, that the 
Prussians were reported to have received a check, and that the 
French were expected to advance. Our anxiety to avoid falling 
into their hands induced us to adopt the determination of pro¬ 
ceeding on foot. We therefore left our carriage and part of the 
baggage under the care of the steward, and hired a peasant, 
who undertook to convey the remainder of it on a wheel-barrow. 
We slept that night at a village, and proceeded next morning 
with a similar companion and conveyance. 

At Kostritz, where we breakfasted, we were strongly urged 
not to proceed, as the French were rapidly advancing in the 
direction which we proposed to take. Regardless, however, of 
this advice, we proceeded on the road which led to Leipsic ; but 


22 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


had not gone very far, when, upon ascending an eminence, we 
perceived, at no great distance, a number of baggage-waggons, 
from which the horses had been unharnessed. They were sur¬ 
rounded by soldiers, who seemed to be investigating their 
contents, while some of the party remained near them on 
horseback. It was now too late to think of retreating, as they 
had, of course, perceived us, and could have overtaken us in a 
very few minutes. We therefore advanced boldly towards them, 
and soon found, when we arrived within hearing, that they were 
French soldiers, as we distinctly heard a number of their charac¬ 
teristic oaths and other expletives. 

One of them (a chasseur) addressed us in broken German, and 
asked for our passport, which we produced, adding, that, as we 
were on neutral territory, we hoped he would permit us to pro¬ 
ceed on our journey. This he declared to be impossible; and 
desired us to step into an adjoining field, where we might speak 
to the commanding officer: he, at the same time, directed one 
of his comrades to escort us, enjoining him strictly to protect 
our baggage from spoliation. The officer received us rather 
roughly; and when we said, that we were anxious to reach 
Leipsic on account of the fair, declared, that this must be false, 
and that he thought we had very different objects in view; but 
that, at all events, he must send us to Gera, to be examined by 
the Grand Duke (meaning Murat). 

We accordingly returned to the high road, and proceeded 
slowly towards Gera. The whole scene was to me equally novel 
and interesting. We passed along the line of the captured 
baggage-waggons, which the French were busily occupied in 
plundering; some of them appropriated to themselves officers’ 
great coats; others, after kicking away their old boots, drew on 
a pair of new ones. A number of the country people had been 
attracted to the spot, to see what was going on; and were, in 
some instances, permitted by the soldiers to share in the spoil. 
I heard one of them say, (though probably understood only by 
myself,) “ Allons, mes enfans, prenez tout ce que vous voudrez ; 
laissez-nous seulement l’argent et le vin.” * The ground was 
strewed with papers of the most miscellaneous kind : letters, 

* Come, my friends, choose what you like, only leave us the money and the 
wine. 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


23 


account-books, pamphlets, &c. were lying promiscuously in the 
mud. On one side of the road, but at some distance from it, 
a number of troops were picturesquely drawn up, some of whom 
appeared to be in quest of hares, or any other game, which 
might be discovered in the fields. We also met a great number 
of soldiers advancing, though not in a very orderly way, from 
Gera; some of whom had geese or other kinds of poultry in 
their hands, for which it was more than probable they had not 
paid. 

• We very soon found, that the kindness of our friend, the 
chasseur, in providing us with a protector, was by no means a 
superfluous precaution. Many of the soldiers, whom we met, no 
sooner saw the countryman, who was conducting our baggage 
on the wheel-barrow, than they exclaimed, “A qui ces coffres? 
qu’on les ouvre tout de suite.” * On these occasions, our chasseur 
interposed and said, “Non, non! camarade, ces coffres sont a 
moi; ils sont du moins sous ma protection.” -j* This answer 
generally elicited some indication of discontent; such as, “ Pardi! 
camarade, tu es fort heureux. Je parie qu’il y a des tresors 
dedans.” J A very unfounded conjecture, and which only arose 
from the circumstance of their not being given up to be plun¬ 
dered. The chasseur not only protected our property, but 
seemed by no means unwilling that we should add to it; for 
he begged that we woidd help ourselves to any articles in the 
baggage-waggons, which might strike our fancy. The country¬ 
man took him at his word, and enriched his wheel-barrow with 
several articles of linen ; but I contented myself with taking a 
brass button out of a small box, which was lying on the 
ground, and which I long preserved as a memorial of the day’s 
adventure. 

Having informed the chasseur, that I was an Englishman, he 
conversed with me very freely; and I perceived, that many of 
his comrades, who had at first passed by without accosting us, 
when they heard from him that I was an Englishman, turned 

* To whom do these boxes belong ? Let them be opened immediately. 

f No, comrade: these boxes belong to me, at least they are under my pro¬ 
tection. 

t Ha ! comrade, you are a lucky fellow. I would lay any wager they con¬ 
tain a treasure. 


24 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


back, saluted me courteously, and seemed pleased at being able 
to talk with me : “ Ah ! Monsieur est Anglois, a ce que j apprens. 
Pour moi, j’aime les Anglois. Apres tout, Monsieur, il n’y a que 
deux nations; la notre, et vous autres Anglois. A 9 a, Monsieur, 
ne trouvez-vous pas, qu’il faut que le Roi de Prusse soit bien 
fou, pour oser nous declarer la guerre ? II auroit du etre bien 
content que l’Empereur le laissat regner dans son Berlin. Mais 
n’importe : C’est tant mieux pour nous. Combien y a-t-il d’ici 
a Berlin, Monsieur ? Croyez-moi, Monsieur, nous y serons avant 
qu’il soit peu.” * I had sometimes half a dozen of these per¬ 
sonages conversing with me at once; and when one left me, his 
place was soon supplied by another. 

In several places, a board had been put up, on which was 
inscribed in French and German,—“ Fiirstl: Reussisch neutrales 
Territorium.”—“ Pays neutre, appartenant au Prince de Reuss.” j* 
And I remember two or three French soldiers, who had for some 
time been staring at this inscription, turned round to me, and 
said, “Monsieur, qu’est-ce que cela veut dire? Je croyois que 
nous dtions en Allemagne, et voila que tout d’un coup nous nous 
trouvons en Russie.” j I endeavoured to explain to my querist, 
that he was not in the dominions of the Emperor of Russia, but 
in those of a much less powerful potentate, the Prince of Reuss. 
“ Le Prince de Reuss ! Ma foi, c’est la premiere fois que j’entends 
parler de ce Prince \k. Ah, ah ! je sais ce que vous voulez dire, 
Monsieur; c’est un de ces petits princillons, qu’on trouve partout 
en Allemagne, et sur lesquels l’Empereur d’Allemagne n’a aucun 
pouvoir! Pardi, nous n’avons point de tels gens chez nous. 
L’Empereur y mettroit bientot ordre, allez. II n’y rien de tel 
chez vous non plus, Monsieur; n’est-ce pas? Ah, je le crois 
bien; vous etes trop sages pour cela, vous autres Anglois.” § 

* You are an Englishman, sir, from what I learn. I like the English. After 
all, sir, there are hut two nations in the world ; the French and you English. 
Don’t you think, sir, that the king of Prussia must have lost his senses to dare 
o declare war ? He might have been satisfied that the Emperor should let 
him reign in his city of Berlin. But it does not signify ; it is all the better for 
us. How far is it from this to Berlin ? Depend upon it, sir, we shall be there 
before long. 

f This is neuter country, belonging to the Prince of Reuss. 

t Sir, what is the meaning of that ? I thought we were in Germany, and 
all of a sudden we find ourselves in Russia. 

§ The Prince of Reuss ! Faith, that is the first time I ever heard of such a 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


25 


I have thought it right to detail these short but authentic 
specimens of the numerous dialogues, in which I bore a part 
before we reached Gera. Most of the soldiers who conversed 
with me paid many compliments to the English, and seemed to 
draw a marked distinction between them and every other nation. 
It is difficult to say whether their enthusiastic attachment to 
their leader, their contemptuous detestation of the Prussians, 
or their confidence as to the successful result of the campaign, 
were most predominant. I was led to infer, from the general 
tone of their remarks, that they thought it would be as easy to 
advance to Berlin as to return to Paris. 

When we arrived near Gera, our chasseur gave each of us a 
tolerably broad hint, that he expected some indemnity for having 
quitted his corps, in order to protect us and our baggage. He 
seemed tolerably satisfied with a Frederick d’or, which was given 
to him by each of us ; and when we parted, I added some silver, 
which I believe induced him to see our baggage deposited 
safely at the principal inn. We ourselves were conducted to 
the house at which the Grand Duke of Berg had his head¬ 
quarters ; and after ascending the staircase, found ourselves in 
a kind of antechamber, in which there were a number of French 
officers in various uniforms. Mr. Kegel was first ushered into 
the Grand Duke’s apartment; and, as soon as he quitted it, I 
was introduced. 

It was not without feelings of anxiety that I found myself in 
the presence of this distinguished personage. I found him 
standing near a table, on which there was spread a very large 
map of Germany. Small wooden pegs, thrust through circular 
pieces of cork (at least so they seemed to me), were inserted 
into the names of various places on the map, whilst others were 
lying loose upon it for the same purpose. I should be very 
ungrateful if I ever forgot the kind, frank, and prepossessing 
manner in which his Highness received me. He was dressed in 

prince. Ah, ah ! I know what you would be at. You mean one of those 
petty princes who are to be met with all over Germany, and over whom the 
Emperor of Germany has no power. Faith, vx have no such people. The 
Emperor would soon say to them, “ Begone ! ” There are no such people in 
your country either. Is it not so ? I don’t doubt it. You English have too 
much sense for that. 


2G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


a kind of red velvet habit, bordered with gold; and as soon as 
I contemplated his open and expressive countenance, I felt 
relieved from all embarrassment. After bowing slightly, he 
begged that I would advance, and told me I had nothing to 
fear; that he should merely put some questions to me, which 
he requested I would answer as correctly as possible. These 
interrogatories so much resembled those which afterwards were 
put by Napoleon, that it would be superfluous to state them in 
detail; but I recollect that he seemed very anxious to know 
where Marshal Mbllendorf was. 

Having ascertained the very few particulars, which I was 
enabled to state, in regard to the numbers, position, and 
rumoured intentions of the Prussian army, he concluded by 
assuring me, that he had no doubt of the correctness of what I 
had stated; that he believed I was the person whom I repre¬ 
sented myself to be : and that he was therefore the more sorry 
that it was out of his jDOwer to supply me with passports for 
proceeding on my journey, but that he was willing to do me the 
only service he could, by sending me to Auma to be examined 
by his Majesty the Emperor and King, who, he had no doubt, 
on hearing my story, would do me that favour, which, had it 
been in his own power, he would himself most willingly have 
granted. 

It is impossible to describe how much I felt astonished at 
this declaration, and how much I was confounded by the unex¬ 
pected prospect of being thus brought into the presence of the 
greatest man of the age. Before I had recovered myself, the 
Grand Duke had rung the bell, and given some orders to his 
servant; in consequence of which, an officer in (I think) a 
green uniform entered the room. “ Count,” said the Grand 
Duke, “ this is a young English gentleman, who has been 
stopped at the advanced posts.” The officer immediately 
addressed me in English; and, after putting two or three 
unimportant questions, turned round to the Grand Duke, and 
said, “Yes, I see he is evidently an Englishman.” “Well, 
Count,” said Murat, “ as you are going to Auma at any rate, 
you will be so good as to convey this gentleman and his 
travelling companion with you in the carriage, and cause them 
to be examined by his Majesty the Emperor and King; telling 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


27 


him, at the same time, that they have already been examined by 
me, and that nothing occurred which induced me to form any 
surmise to their prejudice.” He then nodded to me very 
graciously ; and, after bowing profoundly, I left the apartment, 
accompanied by the officer, and remained in the antechamber, 
whilst he went to inquire about the carriage and horses. 

I soon learned that this gentleman was Count Frohberg (or 
Mountjoy), grand veneur to the King of Bavaria, who stood 
very high in the confidence and good graces both of his own 
sovereign and of Napoleon. 

Whilst waiting for his return, I saw the Grand Duke pass 
through the antechamber, clad in a sumptuous uniform, with 
many stars, and leading to a repast a lady, who, I was informed, 
was a Princess of Beuss. He stopped for a few minutes, and 
spoke to a Prussian officer, who had been taken prisoner, I 
believe, at the battle of Saalfield. I was not able to hear very 
distinctly what passed; but I understood him to be taxing the 
Prussians with temerity, in having attacked a French corps 
with a very inferior number; adding, that although the 
Prussians might not love the French, they at least ought to 
esteem them. After this short conversation, the Grand Duke 
made a slight inclination of the head, and followed the Princess 
into the other apartment. 

Count Frohberg soon afterward returned, and informed us 
that the carriage was ready. We immediately got into it, and 
set out for Auma. 

I found my new companion very kind-hearted and intelligent, 
a little sanguine and hasty in his temper, but evidently most 
susceptible of gratitude and friendship. His countenance was 
pale, but animated. Our conversation was chiefly carried on in 
English; and he inquired with much eagerness after his British 
friends * Before we had been many minutes in the carriage, 
he asked me whether I was acquainted with Lady Louisa 
Manners (the present Countess of Dysart), accompanying his 
inquiry with a cordial encomium. I was unable at that time 

* I had the satisfaction of being presented to his amiable widow, when at 
Munich, in 1810. The Countess informed me that her husband had alluded to 
this adventure, and expressed much kindness towards me ; and she was so 
obliging as to present to me a ring which had belonged to him. 


28 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

(though now more fortunate) to answer that question in the 
affirmative; but asked the Count in return, whether he knew 
her ladyship’s son-in-law, my intimate and excellent friend, 
Colonel Duff (now Earl of Fife). As soon as I mentioned that 
I was a friend of Colonel Duff’s, he shook me by the hand with 
the greatest warmth; and our common regard for my dis¬ 
tinguished countryman (a regard in which all who know him so 
largely sympathise,) not only created a link of attachment 
between us, but mainly tended to render his exertions in my 
behalf more cordial and more unremitting. 

We met, in the dark, a long row of waggons and artillery, at 
a narrow part of the road, where two carriages could not well 
pass abreast; and our carriage was obliged to draw up in a 
field, until these waggons and other conveyances had proceeded. 
It was in vain that my friend, the Count, dismounted angrily 
from the carriage, and authoritatively desired the drivers to 
draw up on one side and allow our carriage to pass, telling them 
who he was, where he was going, and that he was expected to 
sup with the Emperor. They coolly laughed at all his earnest¬ 
ness ; and one of them told him that he was afraid his supper 
would be very cold before he got to his journey’s end. 

The Count did not recover his good humour until some time 
after we had quitted the scene of our detention. The spectacle 
around us was most interesting. A number of fires were 
kindled in various directions, around which we perceived the 
French soldiers singing, shouting, sleeping, or cooking their 
victuals. 

The Count was remarkably communicative; but without 
attempting to detail many interesting facts which he narrated, 
I cannot avoid recording one speech of his, which remained 
deeply impressed upon my mind. 

I mentioned that I had left the Prussian army in as high 
spirits and as confident of victory as the French ; and that I 
therefore thought the issue of the contest rather doubtful. “ A 
decisive battle,” replied he, “ will be fought before many days 
have elapsed ; and I will bet you sixty Napoleons to one that 
the victory will be ours. You say that the Prussians are in 
high spirits ; but on what is their confidence grounded ? Not, 
surelv, in respect for the talents of their General—not on the 


INTERVIEW WITH TIIE FIRST NAPOLEON. 20 

remembrance of exploits of their own, nor in love for the service 
in which they are so ill used ? The French, on the other hand, 
adore their leader, who so often has conducted them to victory: 
—their own past achievements inspire them with confidence in 
themselves :—they are attached to a service, in which they are 
well aware that the meanest and most friendless may acquire 
reputation and advancement. The Emperor knows their cha¬ 
racter well, and has employed every means to conciliate affection 
to his person, as well as to enforce obedience to his authority. 
No service is permitted to pass unnoticed or unrecompensed. 
He is endowed with an excellent memory, and is often known 
to address even a private soldier or subaltern officer, whom he 
remembers to have seen at Austerlitz or Marengo, reminding 
them of their former good conduct, and calling upon them to 
act up to it in future. By such means, he not only captivates 
the heart of the person so noticed, but excites emulation on the 
part of all who witnessed such a scene, and who long, by future 
prowess, to attain a similar distinction. The very institution 
of the Legion of Honour, which is attainable by all classes, has 
greatly increased his popularity, and is become a general object 
of military ambition. In short, I believe I may say that no 
General was ever more studious to captivate the affections and 
win the confidence of his army ; nor was any ever more 
successful.” 

I do not pretend to say that these are the exact words of 
Count Frohberg, but they express his sentiments without any 
exaggeration. He cherished a warm attachment for the person 
and character of Napoleon ; but I am persuaded that his 
opinion, though somewhat biassed by this feeling, was founded 
on personal knowledge, as well as on that accurate information 
which his rank and station afforded him so many opportunities 
to acquire. 

We arrived at Auma at a very early hour in the morning. 
The Count alighted from the carriage, and repaired to the 
house at which the Emperor’s head-quarters were situated. 
He returned almost immediately, and informed us that his 
Majesty had retired to rest; but added that he would come 
and let us know as soon as the Emperor Avas ready to re¬ 


ceive us. 


so 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


The morning was very cold, and we remained, rather uncom¬ 
fortably, in the caleche (the leather in front of which closed but 
imperfectly), for upwards of an hour. My friend Mr. Regel 
and I agreed, that we would not prepare any answers to any 
questions; but that, by narrating every circumstance exactly 
as it occurred, we should avoid every discrepancy which could 
excite any suspicion. The Count at last returned, and informed 
us that the Emperor was up, and wished to see us. This was 
to us an anxious moment; and we descended from the carriage 
with feelings which I shall not attempt to pourtray. “You need 
not be afraid,” said the Count, “ the Emperor won’t eat you.” I 
assured him that I was not afraid of that, and that he, who had 
nothing to fear, was shivering from the cold as much as I was. 
This remark, however, made me summon up more resolution 
than a youth of sixteen might otherwise have felt under such 
circumstances. I had reminded Mr. Regel that it was now my 
turn to be examined first. We walked hastily across the street, 
and, after ascending a staircase, found ourselves in the ante¬ 
chamber, in which there were a number of officers, and where I 
observed also some materials for breakfast. The Count opened 
a door, and beckoned me to follow him. I heard him say, 
“ Voila, Sire, le jeune Anglois, dont je viens de parler a votre 
Majeste.”* * * § The door closed as soon as I entered the room. I 
made a low bow ; and, on raising my eyes from the ground, 
perceived standing before me a little figure, arrayed in a white 
night-cap and dressing-gown ; an officer in uniform, whom I 
found to be Marshal Berthier, the Minister at War, was 
standing by his side. The Emperor stood still, with his arms 
crossed, and a cup of coffee in his right hand : he surveyed me 
attentively, and said “ Qui etes-vous ? ”*f* My reply was, “ Sire, 
je suis sujet de S. M. Britannique.” J “D’ou venez-vous ? ”§ 
“ Sire, Je viens de Gotha en Saxe ; et en me rendant dela 
Leipzig, j’ai dte arrete par quelques soldats des avant-postes, 
qui m’ont mene a Gera chez le Grand Due de Berg; et S. A. 


* Behold, Sire, the young Englishman of whom I have* just spoken to your 
Majesty, 

f Who are you ? 

f Sire, I am a subject of his Britannic Majesty. 

§ W T here do you come from ? 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


81 

m a envoye ici pour avoir l’honneur d’etre examinb par V. M.”* 
“Par oil etes-vous passe?” “Sire, je suis passe par Weimar, 
Erfurt, et Jena, d’ou n’ayant pas pu procurer des clievaux pour 

nous conduire plus loin que jusqu’a Gleina-” “ Oil est Gleina ? 

et qu est-ce que c’est ? ” “ Gleina, Sire, est un petit village, 

appartenant au Due de Gotha.” *f~ 

Upon hearing that I had passed through these places, he 
paused, and then said, “ Tracez-moi le plan de votre route.” J 
He then sat down at a table, on which a map of Germany was 
spread, in every respect similar to the one which I had seen at 
the Grand Duke’s. Berthier was seated at a smaller table, in 
the corner of the room, to take notes of what passed. I stood at 
Napoleon’s left hand, and the Count placed himself exactly op¬ 
posite. Napoleon, as soon as he had seated himself, placed his 
right elbow on the table, and leaning his face upon his thumb 
and forefinger, looked me full in the face, and said, “ Quel jour 
etes vous parti de Gotha ? ” § At that moment I had forgotten 
the exact day of our departure; and, knowing the great import¬ 
ance of accuracy in regard to dates, I began to calculate back¬ 
wards from that day, to the one upon which we left Gotha. 
This pause, though but a short one, excited the Emperor’s im¬ 
patience, and he repeated, in rather an angry tone, “ Je vous 
demande, quel jour etes-vous parti de Gotha?” || His abrupt 
manner, and a significant look, which I saw him exchange with 
Berthier, would have very much interrupted my calculation, had 
I not fortunately at that moment concluded it, and named the 
exact day of our departure. He then looked for Gotha in the 
map, and asked me a number of questions as to the strength of 
the Prussians in that place,—the reports prevalent in regard to 
their probable movements, &c. He next sought out Erfurt, and 

* Sire, I come from Gotha in Saxony; and in going from thence to Leipsig, 

I was detained by some soldiers of the advanced guard, who brought me to the 
house of the Grand Duke of Berg, at Gera, and his highness sent me here to 
have the honour of being examined by your Majesty. 

f Which road did you come by?—Sire, I came by Weimar, Erfurt, and 
Jena; from whence, not having been able to procure horses to take us further 

than Gleina-.—Where is Glein, and what is it?—Sire, Gleina is a small 

village belonging to the Duke of Gotha. 

X Trace out the plan of your route. 

§ On what day did you leave Gotha ? 

|| I ask you, what day did you leave Gotha ? 




32 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


inquired whether I had observed any troops in motion between 
the two places ? He was very minute in his interrogatories with 
regard to Erfurt. He asked how strong the garrison was there ? 
I replied, that this was a point which I had not had any oppor¬ 
tunity to ascertain. He asked me if I had been at the parade ? 
I replied in the affirmative. “ How many regiments were pre¬ 
sent ? ” “ Sire, I cannot tell;—the Duke of Brunswick was then 
at Erfurt, and there seemed to be almost as many officers as 
soldiers assembled on the parade.” “ Is Erfurt a well-fortified 
town ? ” “ Sire, I know very little about the strength of fortifi¬ 

cations.” “ Y a-t-il un Chateau a Erfurt V* * Upon this point 
I felt some doubts; but was afraid to plead ignorance again, lest 
he should imagine that it was feigned. I, therefore, boldly said, 
“ Oui, sire, il y a un Chateau.” f After inquiring whether I 
had made any observations on the road between Erfurt and 
Weimar, he proceeded to question me minutely as to the state 
of the latter place,—the number of troops quartered there,—the 
destination of the Grand Duke, &c. 

On my mentioning that Jena was the next place at which we 
stopped, Napoleon did not immediately discover its exact situa¬ 
tion on the map. I, therefore, had the honour to point to it with 
my finger, and show him the place at which he so soon after¬ 
wards achieved so brilliant and decisive a victory. He inquired 
who commanded at Jena,—what was the state of the town,— 
whether I knew any particulars about the garrison, &c. ; and 
then made similar inquiries with regard to Gleina and the inter¬ 
vening road. 

Having followed up the investigation until the moment when 
we were arrested, he paused, and looked at me very earnestly. 
I may here remark, that he put no questions to me in regard to 
my parentage or situation in life. I presume, that these parti¬ 
culars had been fully explained to him by Count Frohberg. 
“ Comment! (said he) voulez-vous que je croie tout ce que vous 
dites ? Les Anglois ne voyagent pas ordinairement a pied sans 
domestique, et comme cela— ” + (looking at my dress, which 
consisted in an old box-coat of rough and dark materials, which 

* Is there a castle at Erfurt ? f Yes, Sire, there is a castle. 

t H°w, said he, would you have me believe all that you say ? The English 
do not commonly travel on foot without a servant, and in such a dress. 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


33 


I had for some time previously only worn as a cover round my 
legs, when travelling in a carriage, but which I had been glad 
to resume as an article of dress, over my other clothes, when 
obliged to travel on foot). “ II est vrai, Sire,” I replied, “ que 
cela peut paroitre un j>eu singulier, mais des circonstances im- 
perieuses, et l’impossibilite de trouver des chevaux, nous ont 
obliges a cette demarche : d’ailleurs, je crois que j’ai dans ma 
poche des lettres qui prouveront la verite de tout ce que j’ai dit 
an sujet de moi-meme.” * 

I then drew out of the pocket of the old box-coat some letters, 
which had accidentally lain there since I received them during 
the preceding year ; and I also produced, from another pocket, 
some communications of a more recent date. When I laid these 
upon the table, Napoleon pushed them quickly towards Count 
Frohberg, nodding to him at the same time rapidly with his 
head. The Count immediately took up the letters, and said to 
the Emperor, whilst opening them, that, from having examined 
and conversed with me during our journey, he thought he could 
be responsible for the truth of everything I had said. 

After cursorily glancing through some of the papers, he said, 
“ These letters are of no consequence, and quite of a private 
nature : for instance, here is one from Mr. Sinclair’s father, in 
which, after reminding him of the attention he had paid to the 
Greek and Latin languages in England, he expresses a hope that 
the same care will be bestowed upon the acquisition of the French 
and German abroad.” 

Napoleon’s features here relaxed into a smile; and I never 
can forget the kindness with which he eyed me, whilst he said, 
“ Vous avez done appris le Grec et le Latin; quels auteurs avez- 
vous lu ?” f 

Not a little surprised at this unexpected question, I mentioned 
Homer, Thucydides, Cicero, and Horace; upon which he replied, 
“ C’est bien, e’est fort bien ; ” £ and then turning to Berthier, 
he added, “Je ne crois pas que ce jeune homme soit espion; 

* It is true, Sire, that such conduct may appear a little singular ; but im¬ 
perious circumstances, and the impossibility of procuring horses, have obliged 
us to take this step ; and I believe I have letters in my pocket which will 
prove the truth of the account I have given of myself. 

+ You have then learnt Greek and Latin ; what authors have you studied ? 

I That is good, very good. 

D 


34 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


mais I’autre, qui est avec lui, le sera, et aura ameue ce jeune 
homme avec lui pour etre moins suspect.” * He then made a 
slight inclination of the head, as a signal for me to retire ; upon 
which I bowed profoundly, and passed into the antechamber ; 
after which Mr. Regel was introduced. 

This was the first and last occasion on which I ever beheld 
Napoleon. The expression of his countenance remains indelibly 
present to my mind; it was at that time thin and sallow ; but 
every feature beamed with intelligence. I was more particularly 
struck with the penetrating glance of his eye, which seemed, if 
I may so express myself, to anticipate the answer to every ques¬ 
tion, by reading it intuitively in the soul. His manner was at 
first somewhat repulsive and abrupt, but became gradually softer, 
and in the end quite prepossessing. There were several words, 
which I felt some difficulty to express in French; amongst which, 
I remember, were “ baggage-waggons ” and “wheel-barrow.” He 
himself, however, immediately suggested the appropriate terms; 
and it appeared to me, that nothing could surpass the lucid and 
comprehensive nature of all his questions and remarks. He 
omitted nothing that was necessary, and asked nothing that was 
superfluous. I entered his apartment under the impression, that 
I was allowed to appear before the greatest man of the age. My 
prejudices against him, I must admit, were very strong. I con¬ 
sidered him as the implacable enemy of my country, and the 
restless subjugator of Europe; but I could not quit his presence 
without admiring the acuteness of his intellect, and feeling the 
fascination of his smile.f 

After descending the staircase, I repaired to a kind of bonfire, 
which was burning not far from the house, and around which 
there were a number of French soldiers ; some of whom were 
sleeping, and some conversing with much noise and gesticulation. 
One of the latter, who was leaning his head upon his elbow, eyed 
me very contemptuously, and, addressing me in the very same 
words which Napoleon had used, exclaimed, “ Qui etes-vous ? ” 
Not thinking it necessary to treat him with much ceremony, 

* I do not think this young man is a spy, but the other who is with him is 
probably one, and has brought this young man to avoid suspicion. 

f It is a circumstance not unworthy of remark, that of the four individuals 
present at this interview, I am now—1820—the only survivor. 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


35 


and supposing that, by such a declaration, I should command 
some portion of his respect, I drew up, and replied with a frown, 
“ Je suis Stranger, et je viens d’avoir l’honneur d’etre examine 
par S. M. l’Empereur et Roi.” * This, however, did not pro¬ 
duce the desired effect; for the soldier only looked at me still 
more indignantly, and exclaimed, “ Pardi, on voit bien que c’est 
a present terns de guerre : en terns de paix, tu ne pourrois pas 
t’approcher de l’Empereur de trois cents pas/’ f He then turned 
his head away, and no farther notice was taken of me, either by 
him or by any of the others. 

Mr. Regel, in the mean time, was examined by the Emperor, 
and returned nearly similar answers to nearly similar queries ; 
but when he stated, that private affairs had rendered us anxious 
to reach Leipzig without delay, Napoleon interrupted him, and 
said, What private affairs could be of sufficient importance to 
make you resolve upon passing through two hostile armies ? I 
can’t conceive that private affairs alone could have induced you 
to take this step. Mr. Regel replied, that we were provided 
with the necessary passports for passing through the Prussian 
army, without any molestation ; and that, with respect to the 
French, we had no expectation of falling into their hands; for 
we supposed, that they were advancing in a quite opposite 
direction ; nay, he believed, that such was the opinion of the 
Prussians, and of the Duke of Brunswick himself. Napoleon 
then exclaimed with a smile, “ Ce sont des perruques. Ils se 
sont furieusement trompes/’J 

As soon as Mr. Regel’s examination was over, Napoleon said 
to Count Frohberg, “ Retenez-les quelques jours, jusqu’a ce que 
quelque chose de decisif sera arrivd; et puis renvoyez-les.”§ 

Mr. Regel then joined me in the street. We repaired to a 
kind of public-house in the neighbourhood, and entered one of 
the rooms. We here found many soldiers lying upon chairs, or 
stretched on the floor: bottles, glasses, spilt wine, and beer, 

* I am a stranger, and I have just had the honour of being examined by 
the Emperor. 

f Pardi ! It is pretty apparent that this is the time of war. In time of 
peace you would not be permitted to approach the Emperor by 300 paces. 

t They are blockheads. They have prodigiously deceived themselves. 

§ Detain them for some days till something decisive has happened, and then 
dismiss them. 


36 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


fragments of victuals, &c. lay in confusion on tlie table; the 
odour and appearance of the whole apartment were equally 
offensive and disgusting. I threw open one of the windows, 
and sat there in the hope that I might still have an opportunity 
to see my friend Count Frohberg; nor was I disappointed; for, 
in about an hour, he passed within sight of the window. On 
my calling to him, he came to me immediately; and, having 
predetermined what to say to him, “ My dear Count,” I ex¬ 
claimed, “you have been in England; and acknowledge, that 
you there met with much kindness and hospitality. I hope, 
that you will avail yourself of this opportunity (the only one 
which ever may occur) to show your gratitude for the attentions 
you experienced. Pray return to the Emperor, and expostulate 
with him upon the cruelty of leaving us in this forlorn place; 
more especially as we have fallen into his hands upon neutral 
ground, and without any evil design. I hope that his Majesty 
will at any rate permit us to return to Gera, where we shall find 
our baggage, where our situation will be far more comfortable, 
and where we shall be equally unable to do any mischief, even 
if such were our intention or our wish.” 

The Count readily complied with my request; and returning 
almost immediately, informed me, that we had leave to return 
to Gera, and that the Emperor had added with a smile, “ Quant 
au jeune liomme, dites lui que je suis fort content de la naivete 
de ses rdponses.” * 

The Count kindly accommodated us with the use of the 
carriage, which had brought us to Auma. He himself, I believe, 
returned on horseback. We soon found ourselves in the midst 
of a long file of waggons and carriages, on many of which were 
written, “ Le Ministre de la Guerre.” Cavalry and foot soldiers 
preceded, followed, and surrounded us on every side, and the 
whole scene was busy, brilliant, and impressive. 

On arriving at Gera, we put up at the post-house, where we 
were unable at first to procure beds; the whole house being 
occupied by persons connected with the Grande Armde. Many 
interesting occurrences took place whilst we continued in this 
house. I never can forget the sensations, with which I saw 

* As for the young- man, tell him that I am very well pleased with the 
na'ivetd of his answers. 


INTERVIEW WITH THE FIRST NAPOLEON. 


37 


successive regiments march through the town. They all seemed 
to be in the highest spirits. Their martial music was more 
varied and animating than any which I ever heard, either before 
or since. The cavalry, though perhaps not so well mounted as 
some other troops which I afterwards saw, were peculiarly strik¬ 
ing in their personal appearance ; and I could not but admire 
more particularly the grace, dexterity, and splendid accoutre¬ 
ments of the officers. 

I acted, in general, as interpreter at the post-house. Many 
an officer, of various rank, came in and exclaimed, “ Y a-t-il 
quelqu’un ici qui parle Francois?”* * * § And upon my signifying, 
that I believed I could make myself intelligible in that language, 
more than one of them replied, “ Ah! voila enfin un homme 
raisonnable.” f 

The postmaster’s situation was a very trying one, and he con¬ 
ducted himself with much temper and propriety. The most 
unreasonable and incompatible requests were made to him every 
moment. There were constant demands for provisions, beds, 
horses, stabling, hay, corn, &c. when his supplies had long since 
been in a great measure exhausted. “Faites comprendre h cet 
Allemand,” said an officer of rank, (and this happened repeatedly,) 
“ qu’il faut que j’aie un lit ici ce soir.”^ It was in vain that the 
postmaster conveyed to him, through me, the true but unwel¬ 
come intelligence, that he had not a single bed to give him; all 
the rooms, and even his own, being already occupied by French 
officers. “ Cela n’est pas mon affaire,” replied the other. “ Que 
ces officiers s’arrangent le mieux qu’ils pourraient.”§ “I am an 

aide-de-camp of Marshal-, and must have a bed, whatever 

happens.” 

Amongst others, my friend Count Frohberg authoritatively 
demanded lodgings. The postmaster shrugged up his shoulders, 
and exclaimed, “ So muss ich ein furstliclies Zimmer auf- 
machen /” and he at last gave up some apartments, reserved, as 
I understood, for the accommodation of one of the sovereign 

* Is there any one here who speaks French ? 

f Ah! here is at last a man of sense. 

X Make that German understand that I must have a bed here to-night. 

§ That is no business of mine. Let those officers make themselves as com¬ 
fortable as they can. 



38 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Princes of Reuss. The Count was so obliging as to procure one 
of these rooms for my use during one night. The next morning 
he also obtained permission for us to reside on parole at the 
house of Mr. Weissenborn, a friend of Mr. Kegel’s, who resided 
a little way beyond the town, and who received us with the 
greatest kindness. He held a very respectable situation under 
the Prince of Reuss, and behaved, in very trying circumstances, 
with great firmness and urbanity.* His house had been several 
times plundered; but before we came and brought our baggage 
there, a guard had been stationed for its protection. Mr. W. 
not only had several officers and soldiers quartered successively 
in his house, but was constantly annoyed by demands for rations, 
forage, &c. Amid all his difficulties, I never saw him lose his 
temper, though many circumstances occurred to irritate and 
annoy him. I was informed, that many of the houses in the 
neighbourhood were plundered in the most wanton manner; 
that the locks were sometimes forced open, even when the keys 
were tendered to the marauders; that they often broke bottles 
of vinegar, when disappointed in their expectation of finding 
wine; and that scenes were everywhere exhibited of wasteful 
and unfeeling outrage. 

We here received the bulletins of the progress of the French 
army with great regularity, and heard from the top of a church 
the distant sounds of the cannonade of the fatal battle of Jena. 
Nor was it possible to reflect without shuddering, that every 
report, which faintly reached our ears, indicated the continuance 
of slaughter and desolation, and would cause the tears of the 
widow to flow, and the heart of the orphan to bleed. 

I learned with more sorrow than surprise the event of this 
decisive action, by which the chains of Germany were, for a time, 
more strongly riveted than ever. I shall not attempt to de¬ 
scribe our own silent consternation, or the triumphant enthusiasm 
of the French troops, with whom we had an opportunity to con¬ 
verse, whilst they were eagerly advancing to join their victorious 
comrades. 

The French commandant at Gera delayed for several days, 
under various pretexts, to furnish us with passports ; but I at 

* I again experienced a most kind reception from my worthy friend when 
I revisited Germany in 1816. 


HIS RETURN TO ENGLAND. 


39 


length contrived to see him ; and, after reminding him, that his 
orders were to detain us, until something decisive had taken 
place, I asked him whether this had not already been realized 
to the greatest possible extent ? He laughed, and told me, that 
he believed I could not now do any harm, if I were ever so will¬ 
ing. He accordingly signed my passport, and we set out as soon 
as possible for Altenburg, where I parted from my friend Mr. 
Regel, and proceeded alone to Dresden. 

I here experienced a very civil reception from the French 
commandant, Col. Thiard ; but although I might detail many 
circumstances which I remember with peculiar interest, and 
which might not be devoid of importance in the eyes of the 
reader, I think it more advisable here to close the narrative of 
events, which I have perhaps recorded with too much minute¬ 
ness, but which afford to me a never-failing source of varied and 
pleasing retrospection. 

As might be expected, the narrative which Mr. Sinclair 
gave on liis return to England of his personal interview 
with the first Napoleon, who was at that time at the 
very height of his military glory, excited the greatest 
interest in the aristocratic circles of London. In itself 
the narrative possessed attractions of no common kind, 
but when told by Mr. Sinclair in his own winning 
manner its inherent interest was greatly increased ; for, 
in the course of a prolonged life, in which I have met 
with many persons eminent for the way in which they 
could tell a story, I have met with but few who could 
do so more effectively than the friend who is the 
subject of these pages. But the incessant importunities 
addressed to him for a repetition of the narrative, though 
often coming from the highest and most beautiful in the 
land, wearied Mr. Sinclair, and made him resolve that 
under “ no conceivable class of circumstances would he 
again be prevailed on to renew the recital of the oft-told 


40 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


tale/ ” If the story was not literally encored, just as the 
superior acting of an actor or actress is on the stage, 
there were aristocratic lady leaders of the fashion at that 
early period in the present century’s history, who be¬ 
sought Mr. Sinclair to repeat his narrative whenever 
they met him in the fashionable salons of London. 
The Duchess of Brunswick, in particular, admired the 
story and Mr. Sinclair’s mode of telling it so much, that 
she would not have tired of hearing it had it been 
repeated in her presence every day of the week. I 
believe it was chiefly because of her Grace’s solicitations 
for its repetition, almost on every occasion in which she 
met with Mr. Sinclair in the drawing rooms of Mayfair, 
that he was, as it were, compelled to come to the 
resolution to resist all entreaties to recite any more his 
popular narrative,—much too popular for his own 
comfort. 

Sir George Sinclair,—for Mr. Sinclair had long before 
this succeeded to the baronetcy of his father—in a 
letter addressed to the Northern Ensign , made an 
emphatic reference to the incidents here so graphically 
described, on the anniversary of the battle of Jena, 
in the year 1861 ,—exactly fifty-five years afterwards. 
What a lengthened interval! I subjoin some of the 
remarks and reflections of Sir George, which had been 
called forth by the recent conduct of Prussia in fraternis¬ 
ing with so much seeming cordiality with the Emperor 
of the French :— 

This is the anniversary of an event which, in Butler’s Chro¬ 
nological Exercises,—a work of which my friend Carlyle, when 
here [in Thurso Castle] expressed high approval,—I find thus 
described :—“ October 14tli, 1806. A dreadful engagement near 





ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF JENA. 


41 


Jena between the French and Prussians, which proved extremely 
disastrous to the latter. This is sometimes called the battle of 
Anerst, from an adjacent village. The Emperor Napoleon and 
the King of Prussia commanded their respective forces, and 
both armies displayed the greatest bravery.” 

During my detention, before and after the battle,—a deten¬ 
tion considerably longer than my friend was aware of,—I had 
frequent opportunities to witness, or hear of, the cruelty and 
capriciousness of the Bonapartist soldiers and officers, and the 
prostrate helplessness of the Germans; for at the hospitable 
mansion near Gera, which I inhabited for several days, not only 
was the well-stocked cellar completely emptied, but all the 
vinegar bottles broken by the disappointed and infuriated 
bandits. I need not add that all the money and much of the 
clothing were carried away. The house of a much esteemed 
professor was completely stripped, and all his books and manu¬ 
scripts wantonly tossed out of the windows. 

I was credibly informed that Bonaparte lodged at the palace 
of one of the Princes of Beuss, who, with much emotion, 
pointed out to him a burning village in his “neutral” 
dominions, on which he had bestowed much pains and expense. 
The Corsican shrugged up his shoulders, looked at him with 
a sardonic grin, and said, “ You have chosen war, and must take 
the consequences,”—an insulting sarcasm on a petty but popular 
sovereign, who was wholly guiltless of any proceedings by which 
hostilities could have been either occasioned or justified. I am 
old enough to have been personally cognisant of the insults, 
exactions, and oppressions which Germany, and especially Prussia, 
endured from Bonaparte and his myrmidons, until, maddened 
by despair and exasperation, they rose as one man against the 
most unprincipled ruffian who ever wore the Imperial mantle; 
and at length, with the assistance of their loyal and like-minded 
allies, not only expelled him from their own country, but suc¬ 
ceeded in hurling him from his ill-gotten throne, and emanci¬ 
pating France from his ignominious yoke. The confederated 
sovereigns displayed the most consummate wisdom by adopting 
the determination never to acknowledge any member of the 
Corsican family as ruler of the realm which he had brought to 
the brink of ruin, and whose resources he had wasted in un- 


42 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


provoked wars, undertaken from a base and blood-thirsty spirit 
of vindictiveness, vain-glory, and ambition. 

During Mr. Sinclair’s residence in Germany, after lie 
had completed his education in that country, he met with 
much of the highest and choicest society in Austria and 
Prussia. His facility of acquiring the knowledge of 
languages when at Harrow was the subject of wonder 
alike to tutors and to his fellow pupils at that celebrated 
seminary of learning, but it made itself more manifest still 
during his stay in Germany. On one occasion he was 
dining at the court of Prussia, when an interesting 
and animated discussion sprang up on some topic which 
occupied public attention at the time. One of the party, 
who was an accomplished person, took an erroneous 
view of the matter in dispute, but every one present was 
afraid to enter the lists with him, till Mr. Sinclair, who 
was seated near the king, had the courage to do so, and 
to the surprise of the king—father of the present King 
of Prussia—and of everyone constituting the guests of 
royalty, not only triumphantly refuted the arguments 
of the other, but did so in such pure German, that the 
king, turning to the nobleman who had introduced him 
to the Prussian court, said, in lialf-indignant tones, under 
the impression that Mr. Sinclair was a native of Germany, 
—“ I thought you told me he was an Englishman.” But 
it was not in the German language alone that Mr. 
Sinclair made marvellous progress. He was equally 
successful in acquiring a wonderful knowledge of every 
branch of learning to the study of which he applied him¬ 
self. And whatever he once learnt he never forgot. Of 
his most retentive memory, I had, in the latter part of 
his life, many striking proofs. 





A GERMAN COUNT’S KNOWLEDGE OF ENGLISH. 


43 


The Germans, as every one knows, are a remarkable 
people for the aptitude they possess for mastering foreign 
languages, and as a body they are proud of the fact. 
Mr. Sinclair used to tell ail amusing anecdote in con- 
nection with this German pride of the facility with 
which they can acquire a knowledge of foreign lan¬ 
guages. When he was at the court of Austria, Count 
Rosenberg specially prided himself on his fancied know¬ 
ledge of the English language. In conversation with 
Mr. Sinclair, the Count asked him to correct him if he 
ever, when speaking English, made use of a wrong word. 
Mr. Sinclair, as might be expected, courteously under¬ 
took to comply with his request. A few days afterwards, 
the Count asked Mr. Sinclair whether he “ had not been 
at the ball the evening before ? ” Mr. Sinclair answered 
that he had not been at any ball on the night in 
question. “I am certain,” said the Count, “that I saw 
you in one of the boxes.” “ Oh ! you mean,” remarked 
Mr. Sinclair, “ the opera. Yes; I was there; but I 
must explain to you, that we do not, in England, call 
the dancing at the opera a ball , but the ballet ” Count 
Rosenberg replied, “ No; in French it is ballet, but in 
English it is ball” Mr. Sinclair rejoined, “Surely, 
Count, you must admit that I am likely to be correct in 
speaking my own language \” “ No ; ” said the Count, 

mortified to think that his knowledge of the English 
language, on which he so much plumed himself, was 
thus so grievously at fault; “ No ; you have been so 
long out of your own country, that you have forgotten 
your own language ! ” 


CHAPTER III. 


Return to England—His election as Member of Parliament for Caithness— 
His debut as a speaker in the House of Commons—His Marriage with 
Miss Camilla Manners, daughter of Sir William Manners—Second Tour to 
the Continent—Intimacy with Mr. Joseph Hume—Letters from the Latter. 

Mr. Sinclair had not been long in his native country, 
after his return from the Continent, before he was chosen 
member of Parliament for the county of Caithness. He 
succeeded his father, Sir John, who was obliged to vacate 
his seat in consequence of his acceptance of the chairman¬ 
ship of the Board of Excise. He was one of the very 
few members of the representative branch of the imperial 
Legislature, whose names are to be met with in the history 
of the House of Commons, that were returned to Parlia¬ 
ment before they had attained their majority. He was 
chosen to represent the constituency of Caithn ess-shire in 
the House of Commons when he was only in his twen¬ 
tieth year. It was a curious coincidence that Sir Robert 
Peel, with whom, as Mr. Peel, Mr. Sinclair was so 
intimate, when school-fellows at Harrow, should have 
entered Parliament at nearly the same time. The repu¬ 
tation of both the young men, for talents of no common 
order, had gone before them; and when they took their 
places in St. Stephen’s, the greatest interest was felt both 
within and without the walls of Parliament, to see which 


MR. SINCLAIR AND MR. PEEL. 


45 


of the two was destined to achieve pre-eminence in the 
representative branch of the Legislature. Those who were 
personally acquainted with both, knew that Mr. Peel 
had one great advantage over Mr. Sinclair, namely, that 
he was deeply imbued with the spirit of ambition, and 
was prepared to leave no stone unturned, consistent with 
personal honour, to achieve a high reputation and standing 
in parliament; whereas Mr. Sinclair, while most scrupu¬ 
lously doing everything that was patriotic and right, was 
constitutionally remarkable for his modesty, and would 
not, on any account, however great the prize within his 
reach, have resorted to any expedient which was at 
variance, in however small a degree, with his own con¬ 
victions of what was strictly moral and honourable. The 
result was what might have been expected. It was the 
universal feeling that, while Mr. Sinclair far surpassed 
his personal friend and parliamentary rival in general 
knowledge and general literary attainments, Mr. Peel 
was the most effective speaker, and possessed other 
qualifications for office which, with his family relation¬ 
ships, were sure to pave for him the way to a prominent 
position in the Government of the country. 

But though there was much less of the clap-trap 

speaker in Mr. Sinclair than there was in Mr. Peel— 

indeed, I ought to say rather, there was none—it was 

confessed on all hands that, so far as extensive and varied 

information and classical eloquence were concerned, there 

were then few men in the House of Commons, if we 

except Mr. Brougham, afterwards Lord Brougham, and 

Mr. Canning, whose speeches could, in the respects I 

* 

have mentioned, compare with those of Mr. Sinclair. 
But we all know the destiny, as public men, of the two 



4G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, RART. 


fellow-students and friends at Harrow. The ambition of 
Mr. Peel, growing as he advanced in years, blended as it 
was with great energy, was soon gratified. He had not 
been long in Parliament before he raised himself to great 
distinction, ultimately became leader of the House, and 
in due time, as every one knows, Prime Minister. Mr. 
Sinclair was the very reverse of Mr. Peel in relation to 
the qualities of ambition, energy, and perseverance. He 
was a singularly modest and retiring man. He never 
dreamt of accepting a prominent place in the Govern¬ 
ment of the country; nor, indeed, did he aspire at being 
in any sense a public man. He sought not popular 
applause, but was content with the still small voice 
within, which whispered approval of what he said and 
what he did, whether in the House of Commons, the 
drawing-rooms of the great, or in the less pretentious 
circles of society. In politics he was a moderate Liberal, 
but he was a man of too high character, too upright, too 
independent, to be influenced in the House of Commons, 
whether as regarded the speeches he made, or the votes 
he gave, by mere party considerations. The great ques¬ 
tion with Mr. Sinclair was,—“ What is right ? ” And 
according to the conclusion to which he came on the 
matter, was the course which he adopted. But these are 
points to which I shall have occasion to refer more fully 
in future pages of my volume. 

It is an interesting fact that, while Mr. George Sinclair 
was the youngest on the list of freeholders of the county 
of Caithness, who constituted the twenty-two electors 
who then formed its constituency, he should have been 
chosen to represent it in Parliament. It is a no less in¬ 
teresting fact, that he should have outlived by several 


MR. PERCIVAL, PRIME MINISTER. 


47 


years every one of the twenty-one electors by whom he 
was thus first returned to the Legislature. 

Scarcely had Mr. Sinclair, though a mere youth— 
hardly, indeed, having fairly emerged from boyhood— 
entered parliament, than he attracted the attention and 
won the admiration of Mr. Percival, then the Prime 
Minister of the British empire. So much, indeed, did 
Mr. Percival appreciate the abilities of Mr. Sinclair, that 
on one occasion he did him the honour of asking him to 
move the answer to the address from the Throne. Pro¬ 
bably no one equally young had ever before been called 
on to perform so important a political duty. And the 
more Mr. Percival came to know of young Mr. Sinclair, 
the greater was his respect for him personally, and his 
appreciation of his accomplishments and abilities. It will 
serve to show how very desirous the then Prime Minister 
of the country was to secure the political support of the 
youthful legislator to his administration, that, on the 
latter avowing, at that early period of his parliamentary 
career, his attachment to and intended advocacy of the 
cause of moderate parliamentary reform, Mr. Percival 
wrote to him a letter of some length, in which occurs 
the following passage:—“ I should not be acting with 
that openness towards you with which you have honoured 
me, if I did not express my regret (I have no right, and 
have no idea of presuming, to do more) that you are 
likely to exhibit another instance of a young, ardent, 
intelligent, but inexperienced mind, which, caught by 
the plausibilities of Theory, will be led to countenance 
alterations whereof no human wisdom can foresee the 
practical result, on a Constitution which, whatever im¬ 
perfections may belong to it, has been practically the 




48 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


cause and the instrument of procuring to this country a 
degree of liberty and prosperity never known to exist in 
any country or under any Government upon earth. You 
ask, I am sure formally, to observe that our Constitution 
has also this additional claim to our support, at the 
jrresent time, because it has hitherto proved sufficient to 
secure itself, and all that depends upon it, in times when 
all other Constitutions have been crumbling under the 
effects of their convulsions, which similar theories have 
occasioned elsewhere. But I have no doubt, before you 
take a decisive step on this subject, you will first form, 
perhaps have already formed, a dispassionate estimate of 
the blessings which you put to hazard by any alteration, 
compared with the improvements in prospect, without 
forgetting the possibility at least of mistake, and the 
certainty of ruin to all we now enjoy, which, if your 
reforms should not answer, the result of your experiment 
would produce/’ To the letter from Mr. Percival in 
which this passage occurs, Mr. Sinclair returned the 
following answer; in which will be seen the promise of 
that independence and political integrity which was so 
strikingly fulfilled during the whole of his prolonged 
public career, and which, as I can most emphatically 
affirm from my great intimacy with him, he exem¬ 
plified from the time of his quitting parliament until the 
day of his death. “ My dear Sir,” said Mr. Sinclair, in 
answer to the letter from Mr. Percival, from which I have 
made a quotation, “ One act of kindness frequently pro¬ 
duces the same effects as an acquaintance of many years ; 
and as the letter with which you honoured me last night 
contains such sentiments as no one but a real well-wisher 
could express, I trust that where silence would be un- 


MR. SINCLAIR’S MARRIAGE. 


40 


grateful, you will not consider gratitude as importunate. 
Allow me, therefore, to return you my sincere thanks for 
the favourable reception which my letter experienced, 
and for the candid and truly friendly tenor of the answer. 
Any observations of yours upon any subject must always 
carry with them very great weight, and the more impor¬ 
tant the subject is, the greater must be the diffidence of 
those who may happen to differ from you in opinion. 
Having obtained a seat in Parliament at a much earlier 
period of life than I either desired or expected, I am 
conscious that the liability to error, which is common to 
all mankind, must necessarily be almost inseparable from 
youth and inexperience. My chief reason for supporting 
a moderate reform in Parliament is, that it would tend 
to increase the confidence of the nation in their repre¬ 
sentatives, if the mode of election were more free, and 
if the number of burghs dependent upon individual con¬ 
trol were diminished; but nothing is further from my 
thoughts or from my wishes than to support any measure 
calculated to produce any wanton or dangerous inno¬ 
vation. That in these opinions I may be mistaken, I 
most readily admit, and of the two alternatives I would 
rather do nothing than run the hazard of doing too 
much. But I forget how inconsiderately I am intruding 
upon your patience. I know that from you it is impos¬ 
sible to steal an hour and not defraud the public weal A 
Within a few years of Mr. Sinclair's entering Parlia¬ 
ment, one of the most important events of his life took 
place. I refer to his marriage, in the year 1816 . For 
some time previously he had been paying special atten¬ 
tions to Catherine Camilla, second daughter of Sir Wil¬ 
liam and Lady Manners. Her paternal grandmother was 


50 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Louisa Manners, afterwards Countess of Dysart in her own 
right. Mrs. Sinclair was sister of the Earl of Dysart, 
who is still alive. In passing, I may remark, that Mrs. 
Sinclair s grandmother, the Countess of Dysart, was ac¬ 
knowledged by universal consent to have been one of the 
greatest beauties at the Court of George the Third, before 
his lamentable mental illness may be said to have put an 
end to his Court, in the sense in which the latter word is 
usually understood. The Countess of Dysart had three 
daughters, all of them great beauties; but it was the 
universal impression in aristocratic circles, that even after 
her daughters, beautiful as they were, had emerged from 
their teens, her beauty still transcended theirs. I ought 
to add, that probably there is no instance on record, in 
the higher walks of life, in which any lady retained her 
surpassing beauty so long as did the Countess of Dysart. 
Even when she was so far advanced in life as to be con¬ 
siderably beyond the threescore years and ten, the allotted 
period of human life, she could scarcely be said to have 
lost a single trace of that beauty which elicited the ad¬ 
miration of all who saw her when she had emerged into 
womanhood. She lived to the very advanced age of 
ninety-four, when she died at Kew, where she had 
resided for many years. What is more wonderful still, is 

the fact that, though she had been blind for ten or twelve 

* 

years before her death, she took as deep an interest in all 
that related to the literature of her day, and as to what 
took place in the world of fashion, as when she was in 
the prime of life. This fact has been related to me by 
the brother-in-law of the lady whom she chose for her 
companion, and who habitually read to her every work, 
-—but more especially works of fiction—as it came from 


TIIE MARRIAGE OF MR. SINCLAIR. 


51 


the press,—which attracted any amount of attention in 
the world of literature. 

It was, as I have said, to Miss Camilla Manners, the 
grand-daughter of this distinguished beauty, and in 
-many respects wonderful woman, that Mr. Sinclair had 
for some time been paying his addresses. On the 1st of 
May, 1816, they were married. Miss Manners is de¬ 
scribed, in a reference made to her in a memoir of her 
husband, as being tall, very handsome, and graceful, 
resembling her aunt, the beautiful Countess of Fife, 
whose painful death—from her lap-dog when in a rabid 
state licking her face—caused such general mourning in 
Scotland in 1805. Though I had not the privilege of 
Miss Manners' personal acquaintance at the period of her 
marriage, nor for a goodly number of years thereafter, 
yet I can easily conceive what a handsome woman she 
must at that time have been, from what she was when 
I became acquainted with her, as Lady Camilla Sin- 
clan. She was as fine a specimen of a thorough lady, 
alike in her tastes and manners, as one could any¬ 
where meet with; while with her graceful bearing there 
was blended a geniality which made every one at perfect 
ease who was privileged to be in her society. 

The marriage of Mr. Sinclair with Miss Camilla 
Manners proved, as might be expected from the fact of 
its being a marriage of pure affection, an exceedingly 
happy one. In confirmation of this, and as showing to 
what an estimable lady Mr. Sinclair had united his do¬ 
mestic destinies in life, I transfer to my pages one of many 
similar letters which Mrs. Sinclair wrote to her husband 
during those temporary separations which circumstances 
rendered necessary. But this letter is one of many 


52 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

which are valuable, as not only illustrative of the union 
of hearts, and consequent domestic happiness, which sub¬ 
sisted between the writer and her husband, but of the 
evangelical views which she entertained on religious 
subjects. * 

Ham House, Dec. 5tli, 1818. 

My dearest George, 

As this is the last letter I shall know where to direct, I am 
unwilling to lose the opportunity, although you have not been 
so liberal in scribbling as usual; but your travelling about is a 
sufficient reason. I was charmed with your delightful letter, which 
I received yesterday—so pious, so affectionate, and so rational. 
It is my greatest delight, my dearest love, to find you so occu¬ 
pied with the things of the next life, the one grand object which 
should engross us, and fill up every void in the heart and mind. 
I can look forward with hope and faith that through the atone¬ 
ment of our Saviour and the regeneration of our hearts by his 
Holy Spirit, our names will be enrolled in the book of life, and 
that we shall enjoy together an eternity of happiness. This is a 
delight which God does not grant to all, to have a husband who 
has such serious impressions as you have, and who is an addi¬ 
tional spur for me to press forward to gain the jn'ize, and a 
bright example of early piety. Go on, my dear love, in the 
path you now are, and endeavour to wean your affections more 
and more from the things of this life, that you may transfer 
them to heaven. I am as well and as happy as possible. Have 
I not everything, with one exception, that heart can wish ? a 
husband who is at once my lover and my friend, beautiful 
children, and the kindest relations, besides health to appreciate 
all the comforts of life. Among the minor comforts I would 
reckon local advantage, as this spot, particularly after absence, 
causes me the most pleasing and enthusiastic sensations. I love 
Petersham with a fondness I can never transfer to any other 
spot, and Ham because it is so near it. Emilia is much less 
shy, and goes to grandmamma and aunt Margaret, and is 
very merry in the drawing-room of an evening, singing Hie for 
Maeker John, etc., etc. Little Dudley is a fine fellow, and is 
said to have his mamma’s eyes. His nose is long, and his chin 


HAM HOUSE. 


53 


is thought like yours. The two children are now better friends 
than they were. Emilia is of course the most entertaining, and 
a very great amusement to me. Your mother and sisters are 
well and very happy. Farewell till we embrace again. I long 
for that moment. It will be next Saturday at farthest, I trust. 
I kiss this paper for you. 

My dear George, 

Your most attached 

Camilla Sinclair. 

A few words may be needful here in order to make 
this letter fully understood. Ham House, from which 
it is dated, and in which Mrs. Sinclair was on a visit at 
the time to her relative, the Countess of Dysart, is about 
a mile and a half above Richmond, on the left-hand side 
of the Thames. It is an imposing, massive structure, 
with a palatial appearance like the mansions of the olden 
times. Probably few mansions in Great Britain can boast 
of more numerous traditions of historical interest. It is 
especially celebrated as the place in which the Cabal held 
their sittings, in the reign of Charles the Second, to whose 
proceedings Hume and all our other English historians 
have devoted much of their space. The parties consti¬ 
tuting the Cabal were five in number. Their names 
were Lord Clifford, Lord Ashley, the Duke of Bucking¬ 
ham, Earl of Arlington, and Lord Lauderdale, and they 
assembled together from time to time in the capacity 
of conspirators, to carry out the views and wishes of that 
monarch, whatever they might be,—no matter how 
much at variance with the civil and religious liberties 
of the land. They were first called the Cabal by Bishop 
Burnet, because the first letters of their names formed 
the word Cabal,—Clifford, Ashley, Buckingham, Arling¬ 
ton, and Lauderdale. Ham House is still a great object 



54 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


of interest to all intelligent persons who are fortunate 
enough to obtain admission to it. I have, at intervals, 
for years past, been in Ham House; but on one occasion 
I spent a part of a day in it, in company with Miss 
Agnes Strickland, author of the “ Queens of England/' 
and, benefiting by her almost unequalled, certainly un¬ 
surpassed, knowledge of English history, acquired an 
amount of information regarding the royalty of the 
country, from the time of Alfred down to the end of the 
last century, which, I believe, could not be obtained in 
any other mansion in Great Britain. Ham House is 
enriched with pictures, sculptures, and other interesting 
memorials of past ages, and the more interesting of these 
Miss Strickland explained to me, with a fulness and with 
a graphic efiect which probably no other living person 
could have done. 

There is another point in Mrs. Sinclair's letter to her 
husband which requires a passing notice. She refers to 
his religious views. It is right I should remark, that 
the circumstance which she had in her eye, when she 
alludes to her delight at finding from a letter of his to 
her, to which this is an answer,—that his religious senti¬ 
ments are now so sound and so scriptural, is that of his 
having, during his residence in Germany, become in 
some measure tainted by the Rationalism then, as now, 
prevalent there. Though nothing transpires in this 
letter of Mrs. Sinclair's to her husband, to give the 
slightest ground to suppose that she had any hand in 
bringing him out of his Rationalistic errors, she was, 
in the hands of Divine Providence, the principal means 
by which the deliverance was accomplished. 

I have lying before me a letter from Mr. Sinclair to 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO MRS. SINCLAIR. 


55 


Mrs. Sinclair, which is 


obviously an answer to some 


letter from her, similar to that which I have just quoted. 


I give this letter because it shows that he was no less 
happy in his wedded life than Mrs. Sinclair, and that 
the most perfect accord existed between them in relation 
to their religious sentiments. 


Boulogne, June 4, 1822. 

My dearest Love, 

Your sensible and affectionate letter delighted roe beyond 
measure; nothing can be more rational, than your increasing 
indifference with regard to the noisy and frivolous pleasures of 
London; nothing more kind and amiable than your anxiety 
for the welfare and happiness of your husband and children. 
For my own part, I am never more contented than in the bosom 
of my family; and I hope that my mind is in some degree 
weaned from an attachment to certain illusions, which educa¬ 
tion, example, habit, and practice, had for some time fostered 
and encouraged. I am, undoubtedly, conscious that my triumph 
is very imperfect—that I cannot be too vigilantly on my guard 
against the deceitfulness of my own heart—that vanity and 
selfishness too often govern and mislead me—that my temper 
is still too often hasty and irritable—that I am sometimes not 
adequately grateful to God for the unmerited mercies I enjoy. 
But I should indeed be ungrateful to my heavenly Father, if I 
did not feel that some improvement has been wrought; that I 
am more humble, more contrite, more satisfied, than I once was; 
and am now more frequently enabled to worship Him in spirit 
and in truth. I took a walk last night on the beach—which is 
one of the finest and most extensive I ever saw—and read some 
of the psalms and prophets, whilst surrounded by the wondrous 
works of God. I felt for a time the purest and most unspeak¬ 
able joy—my conversation was in Heaven, and my eyes were 
involuntarily filled with tears of gratitude and love. I expe¬ 
rienced, it is true, very poignant feelings of humiliation when 
I reflected upon my own blindness, folly, and stubbornness; but 
then the Father of mercies and God of all comfort permitted me 
to consider the height, the depth, the length, and the breadth 


oG MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

of His redeeming love and mercy, which appeared to me as 
clear, and as wise, and as wonderful, as the works of creation 
and providence which my delighted eye contemplated; and the 
future happiness of the justified through Christ Jesus, though 
seen as through a glass darkly, filled my heart with confidence 
and transport. Alas, the human mind—at least so weak a one 
as mine—cannot long indulge in these visions of spiritual joy ; 
the objects of sense, and the cares of life, too soon recall the soul 
from Heaven to earth: but it is indeed a glorious privilege to 
be sometimes, even for a few moments, permitted to enter into 
communion with God, and feel that his Spirit dwells in the 
heart. If I had no duties and obligations, incompatible with 
such an arrangement, I should like to retire with my children 
and you to the country; to give up London, with all its temp¬ 
tations and disappointments, and devote my time entirely to 
domestic quiet and enjoyments. 

I have bought your shoes, ribbons, satin, &c., and sashes for 
dear Dudley, Emilia, and Adelaide. Give my kindest love to 
each of them, and say that I shall set out on Thursday or Friday 
for England, according as the steamvessel sails from hence—it 
arrives either to-day or to-morrow. 

Sir Brooke is well—he breakfasts in bed at six ; I breakfast 
here at eight—he conies in at nine: we dine at one, and Sir B. 
goes to bed at four. I walk on the shore alone in the evening, 
and devote some hours to reading and reflection. There is no 
alloy to my happiness and quiet, excejM your absence, and that 
of my darling children. 

Were you not shocked and grieved at the death of our dear 
Duke of Gotha ? It has made me very unhappy. I wrote to 
Count Salisch yesterday on this melancholy subject. 

I suppose there is no chance of Laura setting out on her 
travels. 

Believe me ever, 

My dearest Love, 

Most affectionately yours, 

George Sinclair. 

After his marriage Mr. Sinclair paid a second visit 
to the continent, accompanied by Mrs. Sinclair. He 


SECOND VISIT TO THE CONTINENT. 


57 


introduced his bride to those friends whom he formerly 
associated with when in Germany. Among the families, 
whom he and Mrs. Sinclair visited on the occasion, were 
some of the most distinguished in the circles of German 
society, including several princes and princesses, and 
dukes and duchesses. Among them may be men¬ 
tioned those of Saxe Weimar, Gotha, Meiningen, &c. 
While Mr. Sinclair and his young wife were thus asso¬ 
ciating on a footing of the closest intimacy with the 
royalty and nobility of Germany, they were the means 
of bringing about an event which possesses great historic 
interest, both in Germany and in this country. It was 
mainly, if not exclusively, through their instrumentality 
that a matrimonial alliance was formed between the then 
Duke of Clarence, afterwards William the Fourth, and 
the Princess Adelaide of Saxe Meiningen. 

This was an event on which Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair had 
the greatest reasons to congratulate themselves. It was a 
great historical fact, and yet such was their exceeding 
modesty, and their freedom from the opposite quality, that 
notwithstanding my many years’ intimacy with both, I do 
not remember ever to have heard either of them make 
the slightest reference to it. In bringing about that mar¬ 
riage, Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair rendered indeed an essential 
service to their country, for probably no Queen Consort 
in England ever possessed- a higher character for all that 
was truly virtuous, or possessed in a higher degree the 
affections of the people of this country, than did Ade¬ 
laide, the Queen Consort of William the Fourth. 

But though neither Mr. nor Mrs. Sinclair were in the 
habit of speaking of the part they took in bringing about 
the marriage between William the Fourth and Queen 

O 


58 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Adelaide, Sir John Sinclair, Mr. Sinclair's father, gives 
some particulars respecting the matter, in the following 
letter, which he addressed to the Duke of Clarence, a 
short time prior to their marriage :— 


Sir, 


Ormby Lodge, Ham Common, April II, 1818. 


I hope it will not be considered premature or importunate in 
me, to offer to your Royal Highness my heartfelt congratula¬ 
tions on your approaching union, which bids fair to be ecpially 
auspicious to the country and to yourself. Sincerely, however, 
as I rejoice at any event which is conducive to your Royal 
Highness’s happiness and welfare, I should not have ventured 
to address you on so delicate a subject, had it not been for a 
circumstance which has very forcibly recurred to me. 

When my son and I were walking to Bushy Park some 
months ago, to pay our respects to your Royal Highness, I 
accidentally said to him, “ You have recently visited a number 
of the German courts : which of the Princesses whom you have 
seen would make the best wife for the Duke of Clarence?” 
He answered immediately, “The Princess Adelaide of Saxe- 
Meiningen; ” and proceeded to eulogise her character in very 
glowing terms. Your Royal Highness may therefore conceive 
with how much satisfaction we have since learnt, that an event 
is about to be realised which my son had represented to be so 
peculiarly desirable. 

Mrs. Sinclair and he, about fifteen months ago, passed some 
time both at Liebenstein and Meiningen in the society of the 
Ducal family, with which they have since had the honour to be 
in habits of the most friendly correspondence. 

Whilst my son was abroad, he used to write to his friends 
very full and accurate details respecting the various places 
which he visited. These letters have been carefully collected 
and preserved; and it has occurred to me, that it might be 
interesting to your Royal Highness to peruse an account of 
Meiningen, and the illustrious family there, which my son 
transmitted to his friend Lord Dudley and Ward, at a time 
when he could not possibly foresee the fortunate event which 
gives so much additional interest to these details. 


THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE. 50 

Mrs. Sinclair lias also communicated to me a letter which she 
received last year from her Highness the Princess Adelaide, 
which displays so much good sense and warmth of heart that 
I am persuaded your Royal Highness would peruse it with 
peculiar pleasure. If wished for, these documents shall he 
transmitted. In the interim, I beg to request your Royal High¬ 
ness’s acceptance of a printed account of Liebenstein, which my 
son drew up, and inserted in a periodical publication, that the 
nature of that establishment might be known in England. 

Excuse the liberty of addressing your Royal Highness re¬ 
specting these particulars, and permit me to subscribe myself, 
with much respect and regard, 

Sir, 

Your Royal Highness’s 

Most faithful and obedient Servant, 
John Sinclair. 

I shall in a future part of my volume have to refer at 
some length to the great intimacy which subsisted be¬ 
tween the Duke and Duchess of Clarence and Mr. and 
Mrs. Sinclair, after the Duke ascended the throne of Great 
Britain, as successor to his brother George the Fourth. 
In the meantime I cannot help inviting attention to a 
remarkable proof in connection with the Duke of Cla¬ 
rence, of Mr. Sinclair’s moral courage,—though constitu¬ 
tionally one of the most modest men it was ever my lot 
to meet with—wherever a great principle was involved. 
Having spoken at considerable length at a meeting, in 
Thurso, of an Auxiliary Bible Society, his speech made so 
profound an impression on all who heard it, and drew forth 
so much admiration, viewed only as a display of theological 
eloquence,—that it was published by request. This was in 
the year 1823, when Mr. Sinclair was little more than 
thirty years of age. tie sent to the Duke of Clarence, the 
future Sovereign of Great Britain, a copy of this speech, 




GO 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


with a letter, from which I make the following ex¬ 
tract :— 

The larger, though not very bulky, printed document, which 
I have also the honour to transmit, is one which I at first felt 
some hesitation about sending to your Royal Highness. I well 
know, and gratefully remember, how willingly you have always 
read or listened to whatever I have taken the liberty at anytime 
to suggest; but there is one subject which you have studiously 
avoided, if not positively interdicted, and it is that very subject, 
which is discussed (though most imperfectly) in the inclosed 
little treatise—at page G of which, you will find an address of 
mine to the Bible Society of this place, which was printed at their 
particular request. In perusing lately the proceedings of the 
parent institution, I discovered that its thanks are voted to (I 
believe) every Member of the Royal Family, with one single 
exception—and I will not deny, that I experienced no incon¬ 
siderable share of sorrow, that any such exception should exist. 
Your Royal Highness will perhaps be offended at the freedom 
which I venture to assume—but the remark, which Massillon 
addresses to the wealthy and powerful, shall never, whilst I 
exist, and am in any degree honoured with your confidence, be 
applicable to yourself. He says to the great, with his usual 
felicity of expression, “ jyersonne ne vous ctmie assez, pour oser 
vous DEPLAIRE.”* I will boldly appeal to your Royal Highness’s 
feelings, and solicit your countenance and aid in behalf of a system, 
the object and effect of which are, to promote the glory of God, 
to disseminate the principles of peace upon earth, and excite 
mutual good will amongst men. I might mention, as a subor¬ 
dinate, but powerful motive for compliance, that your Royal 
Highness, by patronising this institution, would conciliate the 
regard and esteem of many individuals in the country, most emi¬ 
nent for piety and worth. But I would rather found my advice 
upon a nobler inducement, that of promoting the interests and 
glory of Him, through whose sacrifice and merits alone our eternal 
welfare is secured, and to whom we can never evince any feelings 
of gratitude and love at all commensurate with the value of the 
blessings which He has procured for us, or of the price at which 

* No one loves you enough, Sire, to incur your displeasure. 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO THE DUKE OF CLARENCE. 01 

they have been purchased. I am conscious that I am a most 
unworthy, as well as feeble, advocate of this great cause. The 
remembrance of many sins and follies almost incapacitates me 
from standing forward in its behalf. But the consolation I de¬ 
rive from God’s Word, and the great though, alas, most inade¬ 
quate change which it has been permitted to effect upon my 
own thoughts, and conduct, and affections, render me anxious 
that the same inestimable blessing should be extended (if it 
were possible) to every family, and to every individual upon 
earth; and I am convinced that your Royal Highness’s name and 
patronage would be most beneficial and important. Few cir¬ 
cumstances would afford me so much genuine satisfaction, as to 
be permitted to announce to the Society your Royal Highness’s 
determination to lend it the sanction of your name. Your Royal 
Highness will perceive that I am not venturing to intrude upon 
the sanctuary of your own religious sentiments or private devo¬ 
tions,—not because I feel indifferent as to either, but because I 
have no right whatever to trespass, unsolicited, upon your con¬ 
fidence, on those solemn and momentous particulars. I ask 
pardon for this intrusion; my heart often gets the better of my 
discretion, but though I yield to no one in zeal for your Royal 
Highness’s temporal interests, I am still more anxious that you 
should inherit a crown, of which no contingency can deprive 
you, and which never can fade away. 

As a piece of literary composition, no one can peruse 
this extract from the letter of Mr. Sinclair, to his Royal 
Highness the Duke of Clarence, without admiration. 
But it has a far higher, because holier order of merit than 
the mere beauty of its diction. We see in every sen¬ 
tence the simple and sincere Christian, and we are no less 
struck with that devoted attachment to principle, as a 
believer in Jesus, which led Mr. Sinclair to run the risk, 
by his fidelity to his Christian principles, of displeasing, 
it might be losing the friendship of one who, being the 
reigning monarch’s brother, and his probable successor to 
the Throne of these realms, was necessarily occupying 


G2 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


tlie very highest place, short of that of the sovereign 
himself, in the ranks of the royal and aristocratic society 
of the land. What a noble incident was this in the cha¬ 
racter of Mr. Sinclair! And all the more noble because 
he was at the time on terms of the closest intimacy with 
the most distinguished aristocratic families of the land. 
Nothing but divine grace, operating with its irresist¬ 
ible power on the mind and heart of Mr. Sinclair, could 
have enabled him to write to the Duke of Clarence, the 
prospective king of the United Kingdom, such a letter as 
that from which I have made the above extract. What a 
rebuke does the fact administer to all of us who profess to 
be the servants of a Master who is in heaven, when made 
conscious by the testimony of our consciences, that we 
are silent when we ought to speak,—dumb when we 
ought to open our mouths to say a word in favour of 
Him whom we call our Lord and Master. AVhat the ulti¬ 
mate effect of this fidelity of Mr. Sinclair to his prin¬ 
ciples,—this noble display of moral courage, was, is a 
point on which I cannot speak. All we know of the 
reception which Mr. Sinclair s representations and coun¬ 
sels met with is contained in the following brief note 
which the Duke of Clarence wrote in answer to his letter, 
so far as it related to the extract I have given. 

> 

Bushy House, August 24, 1823. 

I have enclosed to my daughter Mary, who is with Lady 
Erroll, in the Isle of Wight, the Tract, and ever remain, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours unalterably, 

William. 

I say it with all deliberation, and without being influ¬ 
enced in the slightest degree by my personal intimacy 




QUOTATIONS FROM ONE OF HIS SPEECHES. 


03 


with, and my profound regard for, the writer, that a 
nobler or more eloquent letter was never, all circumstances 
considered, addressed by one human being to another. 
Had Mr. Sinclair never written or done anything else in 
the exposition and enforcement of his views as a believer 
in Jesus, that one letter to the future sovereign of these 
realms, would have been enough, in my estimation, to 
entitle him to a prominent place in that glorious roll 
which contains the names of the noble army of Christian 
heroes, who, in their day, shed so great a lustre on the 
religion of Jesus. 

I am sure I but anticipate the desires of my readers 
when I now present them with two quotations from 
this speech of Mr. Sinclair. 

How many of those whom I address are entire strangers to 
each other—unconnected by any tie of relationship or of acquaint¬ 
ance—without any common interest in the passing scenes 
around them ! But oh, how important, and how endearing, are 
the spiritual claims, which each of us possesses on the regard 
and the friendship of all! We are subjects of the same Creator, 
who is no respecter of persons—we are disciples of the same 
Redeemer, whose blood alone cleanses from sin—we offer up our 
prayers for sanctification to the same Blessed Spirit, who can 
alone strengthen us in the inner man, and bear witness with our 
spirits, that, though once afar off, we are now brought near, and 
become God’s children by adoption in Christ Jesus—we are all 
heirs of the same great and precious promises, which alone ex¬ 
hibit to our view an asylum from the wrath of an offended God, 
and a path to acceptance and forgiveness—we all desire to be¬ 
come living stones in that building not made with hands, of 
which Christ himself is the corner-stone, and the redeemed of 
the Lamb the superstructure. 

Speaking of the incomparably greater importance of 
the things which relate to eternity than those which 


64 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

have reference only to time, Mr. Sinclair, in the speech 
in question, said— 

It has pleased God to impart unto all of us (and to myself in 
particular, who am less than the least of his mercies) unnum¬ 
bered temporal comforts. But all the worldly advantages which 
his bounty has profusely bestowed: nay, all that our hearts 
could desire, and all that his providence could grant, are still 
but as dust in the balance when contrasted with the unspeak¬ 
able gift of his love—with that of mercy, which as much sur¬ 
passes every other blessing in value and in importance, as eter¬ 
nity transcendeth time. Ought not our hearts to burn within 
us, as we contemplate the charter of salvation, which alone 
secures for us a personal interest in the glorious heavenly in¬ 
heritance—that great and everlasting charter from which all of 
us mainly deduce the same momentous and consolatory inferences, 
though perhaps as to a few of its minor and subordinate clauses 
some shades of difference may exist. 

I will hereafter have occasion to advert again and again 
to the elevated and eminently consistent character of Mr. 
Sinclair as a Christian. Suffice it in the meantime to 
say, that in no class of circumstances in which he might 
chance to be placed did he fail to prove faithful to his 
high calling as a believer in Christ, and this, too, I repeat, 
though moving in the very highest circles of society, at a 
period, during the reign of George IV., when the aris¬ 
tocracy of the land were far from being remarkable for 
even the profession, much less the practice, of the higher 
forms of the religion of Jesus. 

But I return to Mr. Sinclair in his capacity as a member 
of the Legislature. As such he acted, as I have before said, 
on all occasions with thorough independence. H e was what 
we would now-a-days call a moderate Liberal; but he 
was too honest, and had too much nobility of nature and 
elevation of principle, to become the slave of either of the 



SUPPORTED FINANCIAL AND OTHER REFORMS. 65 

two great parties into which the Parliament was at that 
time divided. Had he consented to act steadfastly with the 
Tories then in power, there was no office in the Liverpool- 
Eldon Government of the day to which he might not have 
aspired; but his was too noble a nature for that. He was 
influenced in all his actions by principles too honourable 
and upright, to allow himself to be tied to the chariot 
wheels of either of the two great parties in the State. 
The question with Mr. Sinclair invariably was, not by 
whom a particular measure was brought forward, or by 
whom it was opposed, but what were its merits or 
demerits. As regarded the effects of the course he 
pursued in Parliament, in relation to its bearings on his 
own personal interests as a public man, the thought 
never once entered his mind, much less influenced his 
speeches or his votes. He invariably spoke and voted 
in consonance with his convictions of what was right in 
the sight of God, and most adapted to promote the best 
interests of the country. In accordance with his con¬ 
victions, he was a strenuous advocate of Catholic Eman¬ 
cipation, and the emancipation of the West India slaves; 
while he voted against various Government jobs, which 
were at that time lamentably rife. The extravagant and 
corrupt pension list of that day had an uncompromising 
opponent in Mr. Sinclair. On several occasions, indeed, he 
had the moral courage to vote for financial and other 
reforms which Mr. Joseph Hume was, at the period in 
question, perseveringly bringing before Parliament. The 
result was, that people began to say that he had adopted 
Mr. Hume's extreme political and ultra-economical views. 
Nothing could have been further from the fact. Mr. Sin¬ 
clair never, at any period of his life, was what is called an 


F 


6G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


extreme man; but lie saw that Mr. Hume was frequently 
right in his introduction of, or in the hearty support he 
extended to, various measures of a reformatory nature; 
and, like an honest, a courageous, and independent man, 
Mr. Sinclair gave a practical expression to views which 
were in accordance with those of Mr. Hume, either by 
his speeches or votes, or by both. 

Mr. Sinclair had not been long in Parliament before he 
had formed various friendships with several of the best 
known public men of the day. To some of these I shall 
have occasion to refer when I come to give some of the 
many letters which passed between him and them. 
Among the earliest of Mr. Sinclair’s intimacies I may 
here mention the friendship which was early formed be¬ 
tween him and Mr. Hume, and which continued to subsist 
until the day of Mr. Hume’s death—a period of upwards 
of forty years. Though not sympathising with Mr. Hume 
in the extreme liberalism of his views,—more extreme, 
perhaps, on various points than those of any member of 
the House of Commons in the first quarter of the century, 
—Mr. Sinclair greatly admired the honesty, the indepen¬ 
dence, the moral courage, and indefatigable perseverance 
with which Mr. Hume pursued his course, as the exposer 
and denouncer of the flagrant jobs and gross corruption 
which, previous to the passing of the Reform Bill of 1832, 
were so rife in every department of the public service. 
Mr. Sinclair’s intimacy with Mr. Hume must have com¬ 
menced very soon after the entrance of the former into 
Parliament, for I find, from a large collection of letters 
from Mr. Hume now before me, some of them written as 
far back as the memorable year 1812, and in March of 
that year,—which was three years before the battle of 



JOSEPH HUME, M.P., AND MR. SINCLAIR. 


67 


Waterloo. I have, I ought to mention, one letter from Mr. 
Hume to Mr. Sinclair, now lying before me, which was 
written two days before that great conflict, the issue of 
which exercised an influence on the destinies of Europe 
too great to be conceived. As I shall have to recur here¬ 
after to the close and cordial friendship which subsisted 
between Mr. Hume and Mr. Sinclair, for considerably 
more than a generation, I will only, in this part of my 
volume, give two of Mr. Hume’s letters, written to Mr. 
Sinclair, at an early stage of the parliamentary career of 
each. Mr. Hume was generally considered by those who 
had not the privilege of his personal acquaintance to be 
cold in his feelings and dry in his manners. There never 
was a greater mistake. I can say, from personal know¬ 
ledge of him, as well as from an acquaintance with 
some of the lady members of his family, that in private 
life he was one of the most genial of men,—ever ready 
to render a service to any deserving person he knew ; 
while in the domestic circle he was a model of all that 
was worthy of imitation. A better husband or more 
affectionate father was nowhere to be met with. Out of 
a multiplicity of letters written to Mr. Sinclair, from the 
year 1812 until a short time before Mr. Hume’s death, 
in 1854, I will, as I have just remarked, content my¬ 
self by giving two. One was written in August, 1819. 
In it we see how high Mr. Hume’s estimate was of 
Mr. Sinclair’s abilities and accomplishments. But that 
letter is interesting, as showing what were Mr. Hume’s 
own views on the great political questions of the day, and 
also as indicating the course which he meant to pursue in 
his legislative capacity, and to which he undeviatingly ad¬ 
hered during the prolonged period of more than forty years. 



08 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


My dear Sir, 

I was happy to receive yours of the 13th, and pleased to find 
you, Mrs. Sinclair, and children so comfortably and quietly set¬ 
tled at Thurso, where the weather must be very pleasant. We 
have found it rather hot in these parts to take exercise in the 
middle of the day, or, if active, to take it without inconvenience. 
Mrs. Hume and I left London on the 28th to pass a week or two 
of recreation at Worthing, until her brother should arrive from 
Trinidad, when our plans for the summer were to be regulated to 
coincide with his, who has been out of England for seven or eight 
years, and Devonshire has been in contemplation for our tour ; 
but Mrs. Burnley, who has been left in our house, was attacked 
with fever, which soon assumed dangerous symptoms, and obliged 
us to return to town, where we have been ever since. We had 
her removed to the country, convalescent, two days ago, and I, 
after an attack of inflammation in the side, which yielded to the 
loss of twenty-eight ounces of blood in twenty-four hours, prepare 
to leave London this evening for Cheltenham, where I shall take 
the waters for ten or twelve days ; and I almost long for my 
return, that we may go down to Worthing quietly to remain for 
two months. I assure you I shall enjoy the quiet of the sea 
coast as much as you do ; for although Worthing is a fashionable 
place, we have resolution enough to keep entirely aloof from 
society, except in as far as we may encounter it in our walks. I 
have much to do and much to learn, and little time for either, 
as week after week roll on, without my accomplishing what I con¬ 
sidered certain to be effected. Like the children who find more 
than they can eat when they have got it, we are often planning 
more than human ingenuity or exertion can overtake under the 
varied and chequered system in which we live. 

With respect to future proceedings, I consider your forte to be 
able to confine yourself to general principles and general views, 
and, if properly directed, such a power is most important in the 
House of Commons, who are, as you have witnessed, impatient 
of detail, and render every man who, like myself, has the mis¬ 
fortune to consider that a whole is made of parts, and that an 
increase or decrease, or proper understanding of that whole, 
is best acquired by an intimate knowledge of the parts,_only 




LETTER FROM MR. HUME, M.P., TO MR. SINCLAIR. G9 

bearable because decorum forbids them altogether to put him 
down. 

I do hope you will see that between a too strict adherence to 
general principles or to details there is a medium which, in almost 
all questions, might be observed, with great advantage to both 
the speaker and his hearers, and, with your industry, if so 
directed, you have a fair chance of success. 

Economy with me is the order of the day, and I look on that 
as the best reform that can be attempted. There are various ways 
in which that may be effected, and each man, as he is likely to 
be affected, wishes to put the reduction off his own shoulders. 
But I think you assent that there is not a man in the pay of 
Government, from the soldier to the minister, who is not, under 
the circumstances of the country, overpaid; and there is not 
any establishment in the civil, military, or naval department 
which is not too great, and which ought not to be reduced. 
With such opinions, you will say, I have plenty of work, and 
may go on. No. The difficulty is to persuade others that I am 
right, and to make the reform in time to prevent serious mis¬ 
chief. You ask, will I reduce the army or navy in these times 
of trouble and disturbance ? I answer, yes, however paradoxical 
the answer may appear to you. 

A skilful physician will apply his ingenuity to remove the cause 
of the disease, for if he attempts any other course he runs the 
risk of ruining his patient by aggravating the distemper. 

Taxation and extraordinary expenditure—I ought to say ex¬ 
cessive expenditure—are the diseases of the State ; and reduc¬ 
tion of expenses, in that view, will cure it. 

The army in a well-governed and free state, in times of 
peace, ought to be small; but will you say that a military 
expenditure of ten millions sterling is small ? The practical 
efforts of the yeomanry show that regular troops are not wanted 
to enforce any orders, however illegal and unjust they may be; 
and to support the peace of the country, and maintain the laws 
against violence and aggression, every man in the State is, or 
ought to be, the active protector; and I feel confident they 
would be so on all proper occasions. 

I am confident you must concur with the public in depre¬ 
cating the rash and cruel infraction of the laws at Manchester, 


70 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


where the particularly quiet and orderly conduct of the mass 
deserved a very different treatment from what they met with. 
It is certainly assimilating the behaviour of the magistrates to 
the practice of the criminal courts, where a man may be hanged 
for stealing 40s., as well as for firing a town; where, on the 
mere allegation of outrage of a few, a body of armed men carried 
death among a crowd of innocent people. If, however, all were 
innocent, the presence of a large regular military force could 
alone have given confidence to the magistrates to have acted so 
illegally and so severely. Ergo, I would reduce the military, 
preserving order by rendering the magistrates more attentive to 
justice and humanity, and by depriving a Government, who 
sanctions such conduct, of the false and mischievous support 
which a large military body gives to them, and has always given 
to oppressors. This, you will say, is strong language, but when 
I witness the parade and conduct of Government in pensioning a 
constable who receives a death wound in executing an offensive 
duty, and for a doubtful crime, whilst they sanction the outrage 
of the laws which inflicts death on some and wounds on hundreds 
of poor wretches, whose greatest crimes are to exist “ out of 
employ ” in a half-starved condition, and yet have the forbear¬ 
ance quietly and legally to assemble to petition for relief, or to 
consider the best means of obtaining that relief, I think it is 
time to look to improvement. A reduction of the military and 
all other establishments must be made if you are to gain ground 
—as you will see, 

With yours sincerely, 

Joseph Hume. 

The other letter from Mr. Hume to Mr. Sinclair, which 
I quote from the numerous letters from the former to the 
latter, placed in my hands, is the following, which is dated 
London, December 25, 1822 :— 

My dear Sir, 

Mrs. Hume and I had been talking about you the evening 
before your favour of the 7th instant arrived, and we were 
happy to hear you and your family were so well. 



LETTER FROM MR. HUME, M.P., TO MR. SINCLAIR. 


71 


I hastened from the north with more speed than I had at first 
intended, because I found that my friends were killing me with 
kindness, and I have since then intended to write to your father 
and you, to apologize for not seeing you on my return, as I had 
promised. 

I reached home on the 1st of October, and enjoyed the quiet 
of Morden and the comfort of my family until the 18th of 
November, when we all came to town. 

My troubles commence as soon as I am accessible, and every 
person who is aggrieved considers that I can advise or assist him, 
and thereby much of the time I ought to devote to other pur¬ 
poses is taken up ; Mrs. Hume and the children have been, since 
you went away, and are now, in good health, which tends much 
to make amends for other troubles which my public situation 
entails upon me. 

You are perfectly right in saying that the tread-mill gentry 
do not work so many hours as I do every day, but there is a 
little difference in my being able, if I should choose, to leave off 
my labour. I cannot, however, at present do that, and therefore 
in point of fact, we are on a par, —both, I hope, promoting 
Reform. 

I send you by this or following post a copy of my speech last 
session, respecting the Church Establishment in Ireland, and 
would direct your attention and that of your father, and any 
other person you think can read it attentively, and favour me 
with their remarks pro and con. relative to the several positions 
therein maintained. 

In short, I wish the clergy to be all well paid,—no starving 
curates and 2000Z. absentees. I wish the bishops reduced in 
number, and their incomes equalized,—the property of the 
church all applied to the uses of government, or to form a fund 
from which the clergy should be paid according to their duties, 
—the land freed from tithe and the support of the clergy, both 
in Scotland and England, and the clergy paid by a general tax 
on the funds and land, in the same manner as the army and 
navy are now paid; all existing interests to be held sacred both 
to the clergy and lay impropriators of tithes, &c. 

Part of this is explained in the speech, the rest will be in the 
ensuing session. 


72 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I beg you will inform your father that the association of the 
counties will not avail the farmer or landowner. It is not in 
the power of the Parliament (I would add very fortunately so) 
to afford relief to them, unless by the reduction of taxes, which 
will relieve the whole community, though in a greater degree, 
under present circumstances, the landowners. I always speak 
in the belief that public faith is to be kept, and that the interest 
of the debt is to be reduced by the same means as the five per 
cents, were reduced, and under the system I have advocated 
may very soon be so. 

Many may think it strange, but I anticipate little reduction in 
the revenue, if the rental of land is reduced this year to one 
quarter of what it w r as in 1813. The landed interest have too 
long had a most erroneous idea of their own importance to the 
finances of the country, and are now very much surprised to 
find that the revenues of 1822 are larger than those of 1816-17, 
although the rentals have been so much reduced. The interest 
of the debt can be paid, although land yields, as I said, only 
one quarter or one third of the rates of 1813-14 ; and if it was 
not paid, the landed owner would not get one shilling more, 
unless by the operation of the unjust and oppressive corn laws. 
There is no fear of any convulsion ; the resources of the country 
are ample, if well directed. Mrs. Hume joins in best respects 
to Mrs. Sinclair and yourself with, 

Yours, &c. 

Joseph Hume. 

What Mr. Sinclair said, and what he himself endorsed, 
as to the intrusion of strangers on Mr. Humes privacy 
at this period of his parliamentary history, and still more 
ten years afterwards, when the Reform Bill of 1832 was 
passed,—was known to almost every one who knew 
anything of his public life. But I will more particularly 
allude to this fact in a subsequent page. 

I here interrupt my narrative for a brief period—an 
interruption which I am sure will be pleasing rather than 
the reverse to the great majority of my readers—to advert 




REMARKS IN REFERENCE TO MR. HUME, M.P. 


73 


to one or two points in the public career of Mr. Hume 
which, so far as I am aware, have not hitherto obtained 
that prominence in the notices which have been given of 
him, to which they were entitled. And, first of all, 
permit me to remark that no man ever stood higher in 
public estimation for thorough integrity of character, than 
did Mr. Hume from the first day he crossed the threshold 
of St. Stephen’s until the hour when he last set foot in 
the House of Commons. Men of all parties, equally 
within and without the walls of the House, competed 
with each other as to who should, in this respect, render 
him the greatest homage. He not only never was a party 
to any job, but his sole aim in everything he said and 
did was to promote what he believed would be for the 
country’s good. Such indeed was the opinion univer¬ 
sally entertained of the integrity and patriotism of Mr. 
Hume, that on the passing of the Reform Bill of 1832, 
and in the prospect of an immediate general election on 
that measure becoming the law of the land, crowds of 
aspirants, in the Liberal interest, to a seat in Parliament, 
earnestly supplicated letters of commendation from Mr. 
Hume, knowing that a certificate of character from him 
would have been worth a score of such certificates from 
other public men. I remember, as vividly as if it had 
been but yesterday, that in the general election which 
followed the legislative adoption of the Reform Bill of 
1832, the Right Hon. Holt Mackenzie, son of the author 
of “ The Man of Feeling” and other popular works, came 
to Elgin, my native town, in the capacity of a candidate 
for the representation of the Elgin district of burghs. He 
mentioned to me, as one having some influence with the 
constituency in virtue of my position as editor of the Elgin 


74 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


paper of that day, that he was the personal friend of 
Mr. Hume, and would receive, were, it necessary, Mr. 
Hume's recommendation to the suffrages of the consti¬ 
tuent body. It is well known that many candidates 
made use of Mr. Hume's name on the occasion of that 
election—the first under the reformed Parliament—who 
did not in reality entertain the Liberal principles they 
professed, but were Tories in their hearts. The term 
“ Conservative " was then unknown. 

Mr. Hume's popularity at this period, and for many 
years afterwards, was a source of great inconvenience to 
him. His correspondence was so extensive, that to have 
answered all the letters he received, even in the briefest 
manner, would have required the services of at least half- 
a-dozen clerks. Nor was that the worst of the matter. 
The calls at his house were so frequent—often made for 
no other reason than that the parties should be able 
to say that they had seen Mr. Joseph Hume—that it 
would have required the exclusive services of one of 
his domestics simply to open the door, and to ascertain 
whether or not it was convenient for Mr. Hume to see 
the applicants for an interview. And then, in relation 
to some of the multitudes who were admitted, it was 
difficult to get them to withdraw. Mr. Hume was too 
good-natured to give such persons what is called a broad 
hint to retire ; but at last he found, by a very “ ingenious 
device, how that desirable object might be accomplished 
without in any way wounding what the French would 
call their “susceptibilities." His plan was, when he 
wished to get rid of a person “ calling," to ask him 
to accept one of his many pamphlets on the prin¬ 
cipal questions of the day. Of course the offer was 




MR. HUME’S ATTACKS ON THE BISHOPS. 


75 


thankfully accepted, and the party receiving the pam¬ 
phlet could not think of resuming his seat, but, with the 
repetition of thanks for the pamphlet, would bid Mr. 
Hume good morning, and make his exit. 

Those who remember the course which Mr. Hume con¬ 
sistently and uniformly pursued in Parliament, and read 
the divisions which took place on the great questions 
which were before the House for fifteen years of his 
parliamentary life, prior to the passing of the Reform 
Bill of 1832,—will have a distinct recollection of the 
fact that during all that period he never was once in 
a majority in any important division that took place. 
With regard to the divisions which took place on 
motions of his own, these were so unpopular in the close 
borough parliaments which preceded the first Reform 
Bill, that he rarely could boast of a minority of more 
than from fifteen to twenty. But from that time, except 
during the occasional short-lived intervening Conservative 
ministries, his name was generally to be found in the 
majority on the great public questions of the day. 

Those who are old enough to recollect Mr. Hume’s 
labours in the House of Commons from thirty to thirty- 
five years ago, will remember that he was persistent 
and uncompromising in his attacks on the bishops. He 
was among the first seriously to propose their expulsion 
from the House of Lords. Had he lived till now, no one 
would have more heartily rejoiced to witness the partial 
realisation of his wishes, by the expulsion of the Irish 
bishops from the Upper House, as an instalment of his 
views,—which will, according to all appearance, soon be 
followed by the ejection of the English bishops from the 
Hereditary House. The favourite epithet which Mr. 




76 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Hume applied to the bishops was, that they were all so 
many drones,—persons who, though so liberally paid, did 
nothing for their money. In connection with the use of 
the word “ drone/’ his private secretary told me an 
amusing story. Mr. Hume one day chanced to see no 
fewer than four cats as he passed along the hall of his 
house in Bryanstone Square. He immediately asked one 
of the servants whether they had so many as four cats. 
He received an affirmative answer, on which he objected 
to so many of that class of animals being kept, remarking 
that three could surely do all the work in the way of 
catching the mice, and that one of them must be a 
“ drone,” and therefore be turned out of the house. An 
inquiry was instituted as to which of the four should be 
ejected, and the verdict was that a sleek and fat animal 
called Tommy, belonging to the housekeeper, did nothing 
but eat and sleep all day. It was decided that he should 
be got rid of; but to this the housekeeper vehemently 
objected, saying that she would rather quit her situation 
than part with her pet Tommy. However, before next 
morning, Tommy disappeared; but how he was spirited 
away, or whether he went of his own accord, remained a 
mystery to the housekeeper till the end of her days. I 
give the anecdote as it was given to me, as I have said, 
by Mr. Hume’s secretary, as showing that he applied in 
his own domestic establishment, even to animals, the 
scriptural principle which he sought in the House of 
Commons to apply to bishops and others,—that if any 
one will not work, neither should he eat. 

It seemed to be the general impression, I may here 
remark, among those who knew no better, that Mr. Hume 
was neither a correct speaker nor writer. If by “ correct ” 




MR. HUME’S CHARACTER. 


77 


were meant elegant or polished, I would admit the justice 
of the charge. Mr. Hume never aimed at polished 
diction, nor eloquence, nor oratory, in the ordinary ac¬ 
ceptation of the terms. All lie sought to accomplish as a 
public speaker was, that lie should enunciate his views 
with plainness and force, so as to make himself understood, 
and, if I may so express myself, felt by those to whom 
he addressed himself. And in that he eminently suc¬ 
ceeded. My connection with one of the morning papers 
furnished me, for many years, with opportunities of 
hearing Mr. Hume, and I have pleasure in recording the 
fact, that hardly any member of the House was listened 
to with greater attention or respect. Few indeed of the 
many M.P/s, during my long professional acquaintance 
with the representative branch of the Legislature, were 
held in higher estimation by men of all shades of political 
opinion, than the member at one time for the Montrose 
district of burghs, and at another for Middlesex, our 
great metropolitan county. 

In thus adverting to the character of Mr. Hume, 
because of his exceeding great intimacy with Mr. Sinclair, 
I may be permitted to digress for a few moments, while 
I vindicate his memory from the imputation so often 
sought to be fastened upon him,—that he was a cold 
Benthamite, an unfeeling doctrinaire ,—without sym¬ 
pathies for suffering humanity. A more groundless 
charge was never preferred against any man. Mr. Hume 
felt deeply for individual or collective distress, but his 
views did not always harmonise with those of people 
generally, as to the best mode of dealing with national 
distress, or distress under any of those circumstances in 
which it was the duty of Parliament to deal with it. 



78 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Every one who knew Mr. Hume in the private relations 
of life will bear me out when I repeat that he was an 
eminently good-natured, kind-hearted man. I could 
furnish many proofs of this, but, as I am speaking 
parenthetically, I must not adduce any. 

When far advanced in life, Mr. Hume paid a visit to his 
friend,—long before this Sir George Sinclair—at Thurso 
Castle. Sir George again and again mentioned to me 
how delighted he was to have his old and venerable friend 
under his roof, and Mr. Hume no less enjoyed the hospi¬ 
talities of his accomplished and warm-hearted friend, the 
Lord of Thurso Castle. 

As I have digressed so far, I may be permitted to 
mention one more fact,—to me, on various accounts, an 
especially interesting one. I had the good fortune to dine 
with Mr. Hume, then generally called the veteran reformer, 
the last time he ever dined out of his own house. The 
place in which we met was the residence of the late Mr. 
William Williams, then the member for Lambeth, and 
residing in Kegent’s Park Square. There were twenty of 
us, all members of Parliament, with the exception of 
three others and myself. Mr. Humes health w T as pro¬ 
posed as the father of the House of Commons, and on 
replying to the toast, which I need not say was drank 
with enthusiasm, Mr. Hume said, that as he felt very 
feeble, the gentlemen around Mr. Williams’s hospitable 
board, would, he was sure, kindly accord to him permis¬ 
sion to say a few words without rising from his seat. I 
need not say that this was unanimously granted. Mr. 
Hume then gave a most able and lucid review of his 
legislative career from his entering Parliament until that 
night,—a period approaching half a century. To me Mr. 





MR. HUME’S LAST SPEECH. 


79 


Humes speech possessed a special interest, because much 
of it was grounded on a remark which I had made twenty 
years before, in my work, “ Eandom Kecollections of the 
House of Commons.” Mr. Hume’s speech must have 
occupied at least half-an-hour, and was, I need hardly 
say, listened to with profound attention and great grati¬ 
fication, as sentence after sentence proceeded from the 
lips of the venerable speaker. It was his last public 
utterance. His voice was never heard again beyond the 
limits of his family circle. From that evening he be¬ 
came daily more and more feeble, until, a few months 
afterwards, he closed his eminently useful life on earth, 
and his prolonged career as a public man. 


CHAPTER IV. 


Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair’s Intimacy and Correspondence with German Princesses 
—The Queen’s “Early Years of the Prince Consort”—Letters from the 
Duchess of Saxe-Coburg, Prince Albert’s Mother, to Mrs. Sinclair—Letters 
from the Duchess of Clarence to Mrs. Sinclair. 

In connection with Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair s intimacy, 
referred to in a previous chapter, with the Duke and 
Duchess of Coburg, when in Germany, formed rather more 
than half a century ago, the fact long afterwards had ac¬ 
quired an interest which it did not possess at that time. 
Little did either the Duke or Duchess then suppose that 
their son should become the Prince Consort of the Queen of 
England, and be, next to her, the greatest personage in the 
greatest empire in the world,—an empire whose inhabi¬ 
tants are not far, if at all, short of 170,000,000, and on 
which, as has justly been said, the sun never sets. The 
circumstance of the second son of the Duke and Duchess 
of Saxe-Coburg thus becoming elevated to the loftiest 
position to which anyone other than the Sovereign herself 
uould attain,—gives a special interest in his parents, to 
the people of these realms. Queen Victoria was duly 
alive to this when preparing her recent work for the 
press. In that work—“The Early Years of His Royal 
Highness the Prince Consort, Compiled under the Direc¬ 
tion of her Majesty/’ and published two years ago by Smith 
and Elder,—she makes repeated references to her father- 





THE MOTHER OF THE LATE PRINCE ALBERT. 


81 


and mother-in-law. The latter was the Princess Louise 
of Mecklenburg, and was married in 1817 to Duke Ernest 
of Saxe-Coburg. In a memorandum in relation to them, 
written in the year 1864, and published in the work just 
named, the Queen gives the following account of the 
Duchess :—• 

The Princess is described as having been very handsome, 
though very small; fair, with blue eyes; and Prince Albert is 
said to have been extremely like her. An old servant who had 
known her for many years, told the Queen that when she first 
saw the Prince at Coburg, in 1844, she v r as quite overcome by 
the resemblance to his mother. 

She was full of cleverness and talent; but the marriage was 
not a happy one, and a separation took place in 1824, when the 
young Duchess finally left Coburg, and never saw her children 
again. She died at St. Wendel in 183J, after a long and painful 
illness, in her 32nd year. 

The Duchess-dowager of Gotha, her step-mother, writes to 
the Duke the following account of her, on 27th July, 1831 :— 

“ The sad state of my poor Louise bows me to the earth. 
. . . The thought that her children had quite forgotten her 
distressed her very much. She wished to know if they ever 
spoke of her; I answered her that they were far too good to 
forget her ; that they did not know of her sufferings, as it would 
grieve the good children too much.” 

The Prince never forgot her, and spoke with much tenderness 
and sorrow of his poor mother, and was deeply affected in 
reading, after his marriage, the accounts of her sad and painful 
illness. One of the first gifts he made to the Queen was a little 
pin he had received from her when a little child, Princess 
Louise (the Prince’s fourth daughter, and named after her 
grandmother) is said to be like her in face. 

On receiving the news of her death, the amiable Duchess of 
Gotha again writes to the Duke of Coburg :— 

“ My dear Duke, this also I have to endure, that that child 
whom I watched over with such love should go before me. 
May God soon allow me to be re-united to all my loved ones. 

. Q- 


82 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 


. . . It is a most bitter feeling that that dear, dear House [of 
Gotha] is now quite extinct.” 

The Duchess Louise was the last descendant of the family. 
Many years later, her earthly remains were brought to Coburg, 
and she now reposes next the Duke and his second wife, in the 
fine family mausoleum at Coburg—only completed in the year 
I860—where the Queen herself placed a wreath of flowers on 
her tomb in the autumn of the year. 

The references which the Queen here makes to the 
mother of Prince Albert are equally characterised by 
great delicacy of touch and depth of feeling. Her mar¬ 
riage was, indeed, as her Majesty says, “not a happy 
one.” I have the leading facts before me, under the 
hand of a late German princess, but it is not necessary 
to make any special allusion to the circumstances that 
led to the separation which took place. The matter 
excited a great sensation not only in all the conti¬ 
nental courts, but among the people of Germany. The 
Duchess of Clarence, in a letter dated from Bushy Park 
to Mrs. Sinclair, furnishes some interesting details con¬ 
nected with the affair. She says, in one part of her letter 
to Mrs. Sinclair:—“By a letter I have had from Saxony, I 
have been made acquainted with the Duchess of Coburg’s 
separation from the Duke. She is already married. She 
had written to the Duchess of Gotha, saying that she 
was glad, and that her second husband was the proper 
husband for her. I do not think that the Duke of 
Coburg is to be blamed in respect to his conduct to¬ 
wards his wife, though he may have his faults, and she 
has acknowledged her ill-behaviour. I lament the more I 
think over the separation; for the Duchess is a person of 
great talents, and possesses many good qualities to make 
her worthy of general regard and affection, if she only 



THE FATHER OF THE DUCHESS OF SAXE-COBURG. 


83 


would make use of them.” It will, I doubt not, be grati¬ 
fying to her Majesty to be made acquainted with the 
kind way in which the Duchess of Clarence, afterwards 
the Queen Consort of the Queen's predecessor on the 
throne of these realms, thus speaks of the Duke and 
Duchess of Coburg, the father and mother of Prince 
Albert, and consequently her Majesty’s father- and 
mother-in-law. 

That the Duchess of Saxe-Coburg was a woman of 
strong affections and exceedingly tender feelings is 
further shown by the following letter to Mrs. Sinclair, 
written on the death of her Highness’s father. A more 
affecting letter I have hardly ever met with. It was 
written in French, but I give a translation into English. 

24th May, 1827. 

What a dreadful shock, dear, beloved Camilla, what a heavy 
grief, has unexpectedly overtaken me. I am so overwhelmed 
that I can scarcely collect my thoughts to seek consolation. 
Alas ! there is none for the loss of a father. 

I have read over again your last letter, wherein you speak of 
him to me with so much tenderness. Good God, what a change 
since that moment. I can hardly realise the idea, which seems 
to me a sort of frightful dream,—in no other form can I view it. 
He passed a month—the happiest of my life—with me at 
Coburg, in good health, robust and gay; and in three weeks I 
am mourning at his tomb. He had suffered from an inflam¬ 
mation of the lung, and, after six days of severe suffering, a 
stroke of apoplexy closed his life. You know how I loved him, 
my dear friend, and I can assure you that you would have 
been sincerely attached to him; I have lost in him a true friend. 
I have seen him four times, and he is more beautiful in death 
than ever he was in life. A charming smile plays on his lips, 
and a heavenly calm sleeps upon his features. I paid him the 
last tribute by placing on his head a crown of laurel, which he 
had so w r ell deserved. He is buried in a beautiful park, where 
already repose the remains of his father and two of his brothers. 


84 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Pity me,—reply to me soon,—and in words of friendship, which 
alone can soothe my grief. May Heaven preserve you from 
such a misfortune, and bless all those who are dear to you. 
Mr. Sinclair doubtless will share my sorrow. I am, however, 
with my poor mother, who is utterly overwhelmed ; but she 
will shortly leave here and go to the springs of Ems, where 
we shall stay until the end of July. Write to Coburg. This 
journey, wherein I shall find recreation in viewing the beautiful 
countries of the Rhine, is to me simply disagreeable; but it is 
imperative on account of my health, which is suffering in this 
heavy affliction. How I have been complaining to my poor cousin 
Adelaide of these newly arrived disasters. The Gazette never¬ 
theless is wrong, and your sad foreboding too soon realised. 
Adieu, my good angel. 

Yours ever, 

Louise E) e de Saxe. 

The next letter from the Duchess of Saxe-Coburg is of 
a very different character from the preceding. It is 
lively in its manner, and varied in relation to the topics 
on which it touches. That part of it which refers to her 
children, and especially to Prince Albert, will be read 
with particular interest. It will be observed that when 
the Prince was only ten months old he was a singularly 
sweet-tempered and pretty child, and thus gave promise 
of that amiable disposition and fine personal appearance 
for which he was remarkable when he reached the years 
of manhood and became the happy and honoured hus¬ 
band of our Queen,—whose devotion to his memory is 
the admiration not of this country only, but of the 
whole civilised world. The letter, like the other, is in 
French. The following is a translation :— 

Coburg, July 20, 1820. 

My good and amiable Camilla, receive my best thanks for 
your affectionate letter of the 16th June; it has given me great 
pleasure as a proof of the continuance of your friendship. I 
should like to have had it in my power to embrace you, and to 



LETTER FROM THE LATE PRINCE ALBERT’S MOTHER. 85 


express my gratitude for all the loving things you have said in 
it: keep for me that precious souvenir which is near my heart. 
That my bracelet had pleased you gives me hope that you will 
wear it often, and then think of me. 

I have lately had here two delightful young Englishmen, full 
of goodness and spirit,—Sir Charles Smith and Charles Dawkins 
(Daukions) ; I do not know how you write the name of the last- 
named. They are relations, and that’s all I know of them. They 
accompanied us to Gotha, where we passed eight days together. 
They were very handsome in feature, and elegant in figure. I 
asked news about you from them, and they told me that they 
had seen you in London, and that you have a sister who is a 
superb beauty. 

Since I wrote we have been having one fete after another. 
Sixteen balls in the space of six weeks, rural festivals, concerts, 
excursions into the country, illuminations,—in short, everything 
you can think of in the way of merry-making. The Duchess of 
Wurtemberg, my husband’s sister, her husband, her daughter, 
two sons, the Duchess of Saxe-Meiningen, the Prince Adolphe 
of Nuremberg, three families of Princes of Reuss, Prince Metter- 
nich, Minister of Austria, and the hereditary Princess of Saxe- 
Hildburghausen, passed some time here since we have been 
in Gotha, where they feted us much. You see, then, what sort of 
life we have been leading. What say you to the arrival of your 
Queen,* and of all the hubbub she has made ? Write me, I 
pray you, all about her, and in full detail, if you dare , of all 
that relates to her. Give me an account, too, of the coronation 
of the King. In short, write about everything. English news 
is so interesting just now that we cannot hear too much of it. 

My children bring great joy to Gotha. Ernest is very amus¬ 
ing. He chatters like a magpie, and shows great intelligence, 
which rejoices me greatly; he grows prettier and prettier. 
Albert [afterwards Queen Victoria’s husband] was always very 
handsome, cheerful, and good. He has cut seven teeth. He 
already walks entirely by himself, and says papa and mama. 
Is not that a little prodigy for ten months old ? 

Mademoiselle de Maiert, of whom you spoke to me in your 
letter, sister to my maid of honour, has married a Monsieur de 


* Caroline of Brunswick. 


86 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Wangenheim, and is the mother of a boy of nine months old. 
The one who wrote to you married a Monsieur de Hollebeck. 
If you see my sister-in-law, the Duchess of Kent, or the Duchess 
of Clarence, remember me kindly to them. 

The Duke thanks you for your “ souvenir,” and I pray you 
to say a thousand kind words on my part to Mr. Sinclair. 

I remain, my dear Camilla, 

Your ever devoted friend, 

Louise D e de Saxe. 

The following is another of the light gossiping letters 
in which we meet with proofs of that cleverness of Prince 
Albert’s mother, to which the Queen, in her “ Early Days 
of the Prince Consort,” refers. It was written in 1830, 
only one year before her death. It gives a graphic de¬ 
scription of Paris after the fighting previous to the expul¬ 
sion of Charles the Tenth. I should mention that the 
letter, like the two preceding letters of the Duchess of 
Saxe-Coburg, is addressed to Mrs. Sinclair. It is long, but 
the interest is sustained throughout. The two sentences, 
“ Have you seen the little Victoria ? They say she is 
charming,” will be read with interest by all her Majesty’s 
subjects. 

St. Wen del, Principality of Lichtenberg-, 

Left bank of the Rhine, 

8th Nov. 1830. 

A thousand thanks, my dearly-beloved friend, for your loving 
letter dated from the Pavilion at Brighton, which gave me all 
the more pleasure that it disclosed the desire of entering on a 
correspondence with me. If I followed the promptings of my 
heart, there would not be a week elapse that you would not hear 
news from me ; but I should so abuse your patience and your 
purse, that I can only pray you from time to time to remember 
me, and promise, on my own behalf, that you shall hear from 
me also from time to time. I am delighted that my letter has 
pleased you; yours and all that interests you will always have 
an interest for me. 


LETTER FROM THE LATE PRINCE ALBERT’S MOTHER. 87 


I am happy to hear, my dear Camilla, that you have spent 
such an agreeable time with your grandmamma and my dear 
cousin Adelaide.* Have you seen the little Victoria ? They 
say she is charming. May she contribute, at a future day, to the 
happiness and glory of her people! It is, indeed, a sad thing 
for Adelaide that she is childless, for she would certainly have 
brought up children well. I wish them for her with all my heart. 
What you told me about the Landgrave of Hesse Homburg has 
deeply affected me. I should, before this, have gone to see him, 
had I thought that my visit would be agreeable to him. How¬ 
ever, now that I know it, I shall not fail to pay my respects to 
him whenever he may come in our vicinity. He has a fine 
chateau at Meisenheim, twelve leagues from here, and he in¬ 
tends, as I am told, to press me to summer there. I shall go 
there certainly, to express my gratitude for the kindness he has 
shown towards me. If you should see him again, or if you find 
an excuse for writing to him, I beg you will bear testimony to 
my gratitude, and you will oblige me extremely, my dear friend. 
Everything that you tell me in relation to your charming chil¬ 
dren gives me lively interest. I wish that I could see them and 
press them to my heart. 

I am much vexed that my last letter should have put you to 
so much expense. I will restrain myself in future, and will not 
again scrawl over so much paper. 

You will, perhaps, recollect, dear friend, what I wrote in 
my last letter about an expected visit of Baron de Zach. My 
famous friend arrived here in capital health, and intends to stay 
till the month of October, when we shall go together to Hyeres, 
just “ to warm ourselves at the fireside of good King Rend,” as 
a provincial proverb has it, speaking of the wine of the south of 
France. Our dear old friend had scarcely been here a fortnight, 
when he was seized with the most acute pains, and found a re¬ 
newed formation of calculus. He would have returned instantly 
to France, but the events of July supervened. He was now in 
perplexity which sun to worship,—so he wrote to his physician, 
the learned Civiale, to ask what he ought to do in so critical a 
moment. Civiale replied, that he ought to hasten to Paris, and 
not concern himself about political trouble which had entirely 

* Queen Consort of William the Fourth. 


88 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


ceased with the fall of Charles X. Monsieur de Zach, therefore, 
resolved to follow the advice of his doctor, and induced my hus¬ 
band and myself to go with him to Paris, and thereafter to go 
with him to Hyeres. Behold us, then, in Paris, fifteen days after 
the revolution ! I had formed a grand idea of the enthusiasm I 
should behold, and the brightest illusions accompanied my jour¬ 
ney. Arrived in this renowned capital, I could scarcely recognise 
it as the same. All was gloomy and sad. Silence reigned every¬ 
where, the shops were closed, elegance in dress had disap¬ 
peared, the only carriages visible were cabs and omnibuses, 
the funds had fallen, the finest emporiums had disappeared, 
and day by day new bankruptcies were announced. The friends 
of Charles X. were in hiding, or appeared wearing enormous 
tricoloured cockades. Everywhere you see malcontents and men 
scowling, or with faces pale with fear. By day all is quiet, but 
during the night the uproar is incessant. The victors of July 
run wildly through the streets, singing, shouting, and swearing. 
My husband went to the Pantheon, and saw the tombs. The 
guide said to him, “ Here repose the ashes of the great men 
honoured by France.” Scarcely had he uttered these words, 
when a working man, with his arm in a sling, cried, “ Bah ! the 
great men ! Look at me, yes, me ! I am one of the wounded ! ” 
I merely tell you this anecdote to give you an idea of the spirit 
which animates the French people at this moment. Having 
seen what was to be seen in Paris in 1829, I limited myself to 
a visit to the theatre, where I heard the “ Parisien ” and the 
“ Marseillaise ” sung by Nourrit, who had himself fought cou¬ 
rageously during the three memorable days. We were also 
present at the great review of the National Guard. My old 
friend, during this period, expected another operation, and the 
doctor declared to him that he must not leave Paris before he 
was entirely cured, and that he must not go to Hyeres. We did 
not wish to undertake such a long journey at such a time with¬ 
out him, and so we returned here. 

We are just now more anxious about the events in Belgium 
than our own troubles, though they have been very serious. 
The events in Germany have had a good influence in respect 
of the future w r ell-being of my countrymen. The Prince 
Regent (of Saxony) is a young man of the highest intelligence 


THE DUCHESS OF CLARENCE. 


89 


and best intentions, loving good for its own sake, and is adored 
by his subjects, while they have no affection for the old King. 
At the head of affairs, however, is the best friend of my late 
father and of me,—Baron de Lindenau. He is about fifty years 
old, of high talent and integrity. He was minister at Gotha 
under my father and my uncle, and was respected as a father. 
After the division of my native territory, he left it and entered 
into the service of Saxony. The unanimous voice of the nation, 
and the desire of the Prince Regent, placed him at this crisis at 
the head of affairs. He perfectly understands the situation, and 
will secure the happiness of my dear Saxony! You will have 
this letter through his good offices. He will forward it to the 
English ambassador at Dresden. 

The particulars you have given about your young family have 
interested me deeply, and I am delighted to find that I was not 
deceived in the ideas I had formed of them. Pray express to 
Mr. Sinclair the pleasure his kind remembrance has given me. 
I often recall the happy time passed in your company, and the 
instruction given me by your husband. I had a visit some 
weeks since from Mademoiselle d’Ultenhoven, formerly maid of 
honour to the Dowager Duchess of Saxe-Coburg. She recollected 
having met you frequently, and desires to be remembered to 
you. Do you recollect Mademoiselle De Boek, who was with 
me at Gotha ? She is very ill at present, her disorder being very 
singular and of rare occurrence: she has abscesses in the 
bones of her face, and suffers dreadfully. I lately received the 
portraits of my dear children, but unfortunately they are so 
badly painted that they resemble caricatures; yet despite being 
especially ugly, I am glad to have them, and add, by imagination, 
what they are deficient in. Adieu, beloved friend, and do not 
forget to write shortly to your attached and devoted, 

Louise D e de Saxe. 

I have spoken of the Duchess of Clarence as being another 
of those continental Princesses who cherished a warm 
friendship for Mrs. Sinclair. Most of her letters are writ¬ 
ten in English, and, considering that she was a German, 
are wonderfully correct. A very extensive correspondence 


90 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


was carried on between the Duchess of Clarence, after 
she was the Queen Consort of William the Fourth, and 
Mrs. Sinclair. In all the letters of the Duchess, she 
shows that she cherished a very special regard for that 
lady. She unbosomed herself to her on matters both of 
private and great public importance; but as this was 
done, in various instances, in confidence, all such portions 
of the letters of her Eoyal Highness are, of course, to be 
kept sacred. Some of them are exceedingly interesting 
in a general point of Hew, and all are pervaded by a fine 
genial feeling. The following letter was written by the 
Duchess of Clarence, from Bushy Park, but I do not 
know the exact date. The Duchess had, at this time, 
taken a great fancy to Orkney straw hats, Mrs. Sinclair 
having sent her one as a present. Her Royal Highness 
expresses her delight with this new kind of ladies’ hat 
in the following letter :— 

I received your very kind letter yesterday, my dear Mrs. Sin¬ 
clair, and beg of you to accept of my best thanks for yours. 
I also am very much obliged to you for the specimen of the 
Orkney straw hat manufacture, which is quite beautiful, and 
gives me great pleasure to patronise it. I beg you to order me a 
hat as fine as they can make it. I keep the pattern to show to 
my sisters-in-law, when I go up to London, as I hope to induce 
them to order one of these national “ Orkney ” (and not 
Leghorn they ought to be called in future) hats. As I wish to 
take my Orkney hat abroad, to show it them as a pattern, I 
beg that you will bespeak it immediately, that I may have it in 
May, before our departure for the continent. It is very satis¬ 
factory to think that we will in future no more send to Italy for 
our hats, but have them at home just as good as the Leghorns 
are. Pray tell me whether you want the pattern back or not, 
as I wish to keep it to show it, in the hope of making this ma¬ 
nufacture better known. Is it long in existence, or only since a 
short time ? Perhaps you could learn the different prices of hats, 


LETTER FROM THE DUCHESS OF CLARENCE. 


91 


and get me some more patterns of the different sorts of straw. 
Forgive me the trouble I give you, but I know it will give you 
pleasure to assist in bringing forward this manufacture. I rely 
on this when I permit myself to give you these commissions. 

Again, evidently soon after the date of this letter, the 
Ducliess of Clarence writes the following on the same 
subject:—“ I beg you to order me two more straw hats 
of the Orkney manufacture, of the same sort as the 
specimen which you have sent me. They are for the 
Duchesses of Gloucester and Kent. This black ribbon is 
the measure of the Duchess of Kents head, and the 
Duchess of Gloucester begged me to order her hat 
exactly of the same size as mine/’ 

The following letter refers to various matters of a 
general kind, but chiefly in relation to the health of the 
Duchess. The good sense of her observations on phy¬ 
sicians will be indorsed by everyone who bestows a 
moment’s reflection on the subject. 

Bushy, Feb. 3rd, 1826. 

My dear Mrs. Sinclair, 

I have to thank you for two very kind letters, and beg to ex¬ 
cuse my not having answered the first of them much sooner. 
However, as idle as I have been, I have not forgotten you in the 
time of my silence, but very often thought of my kind friends 
in Scotland. I thank you most sincerely, also, for your kind 
offer of consulting Dr. Hamilton in my behalf, but I must can¬ 
didly own to you that I cannot submit to it, as I can have no 
confidence in a physician I do not know personally, or, to speak 
more correctly, who does not know me ; for I think the physician 
ought to be acquainted with his patients if he is to do them 
really any good. 

I am most grateful for your kindness, and the great interest 
you take in the greatest wish I have, but I cannot do what you 
propose. 

I hope to gain my object by the baths of Ems, which cer- 


92 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


tainly have done me a great deal of good, but they must be 
used more than once to prove effectual. With the aid of God, 
if it is His will, I again may have the blessing of possessing a 
child. I trust and hope Ems will do me all the good I expect 
from it. We intend to go there again in May, and we shall 
afterwards proceed to our dear Settenstein. I have been much 
better in health this winter than for many winters past, and I 
certainly owe it to the waters of Ems, in which I have much 
reliance. 

I am sure that you and Mr. Sinclair will have much regretted 
the death of the venerable and excellent Dowager Grand 
Duchess of Saxe-Weimar, which is a great loss to all her friends 
and relations. It has affected me most deeply to hear of her 
unexpected death, occasioned by weakness only. She has had 
another fall lately, and broke again her collar bone, which acci¬ 
dent may be considered as the cause of her death, for in con¬ 
sequence of it she became weaker and weaker, and finished best 
her exemplary life without a struggle or a groan, falling into a 
sleep out of which she never woke again. I regret her very 
much, though I must consider it a blessing to her to be united 
with her husband, which she wished so anxiously to take place. 

God bless you all, is always the sincere wish of your truly 
affectionate friend, 

Adelaide. 

In subsequent parts of the volume I shall have occa¬ 
sion to make repeated references to the Duchess of 
Clarence, not only as the Duchess, but after she had been 
raised to the highest attainable dignity in this country,— 
that of Queen Consort to the reigning Monarch. 


CHAPTER V. 


Intimacy with his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence, afterwards William 
the Fourth—Letter from Mr. Sinclair to the Duke—Letter to Lord Liver¬ 
pool—Letters from his Royal Highness to Mr. Sinclair. 

I have spoken in the preceding chapter of the intimate 
friendship which was formed between the Princess Adelaide 
of Meiningen, afterwards the Queen Consort of AVilliam the 
Fourth, and Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair, during the stay of the 
latter in Germany, after their marriage. I have likewise 
mentioned that it was in a great measure through them 
that the marriage of Princess Adelaide of Meiningen with 
his Poyal Highness the Duke of Clarence was brought 
about. 

The interest which Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair took in pro¬ 
moting the marriage between the Duke of Clarence and 

o o 

the Princess Adelaide will be inferred from the following 
letter which Mr. Sinclair wrote to the Duke on the subject. 
I ought to state, as throwing light on some parts of this 
letter, which might otherwise be obscure, that shortly 
before it was written his Royal Highness contemplated 
breaking off the marriage, solely on account of his feeling 
that the sum to be allowed him by Parliament as a mar¬ 
riage settlement, was not sufficient to enable him to 
maintain his position as son of George the Third, and 
brother of the reigning King. 


94 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


April 17th, 1818. 

Sir, 

I am well aware that in thus venturing to address you, I 
expose myself to the charge of temerity and presumption ; but 
I feel truly anxious for your Royal Highness’s happiness, and 
so sincerely regret the unexpected obstacle which has inter¬ 
vened to thwart it, that I shall sacrifice every other feeling to 
that more important consideration. If the union which your 
Royal Highness projected were to take place, you would espouse 
a Princess so moderate in her wishes, so unambitious in her 
views, so amiable and rational in her disposition, so unac¬ 
customed, and I may say superior, to all pomp and show, that 
even upon a limited income, and in a state of comparative 
retirement, she would be happy, cheerful, and contented. I 
have passed many days with her family at Liebenstein and 
Meiningen, where they live in a style the most simple and 
unostentatious. My wife and I have frequently conversed in 
the most unreserved and friendly manner, not only with herself 
and her mother and sister, but also with Mademoiselle de 
Rhamer, the lady who superintended her education, and with 
many other persons who had known her from her infancy. 
From all that I have seen and heard, I feel perfectly convinced 
that the Princess is in every respect qualified to promote your 
Royal Highness’s happiness ; that, as long as it might be neces¬ 
sary, she would conform, and most cheerfully conform, to any 
plan of retrenchment which your Royal Highness might suggest 
or deem expedient; that, towards those respecting whom you, 
Sir, must feel most anxious, she would behave with the solicitude 
of a mother, and the confidence of a sister. In short, I entertain 
not the slightest doubt that you would every day feel more 
satisfied with the wisdom of your choice. The Princess’s sister 
is wedded to a very worthy and excellent husband, Duke Bern- 
hard, the Grand Duke of Weimar’s youngest son. They live at 
Ghent upon (I presume) a limited income, but are perfectly 
happy and contented. The Princess herself, I am sure, would 
be equally so at Bushy; she will not only agree to, but recom¬ 
mend the strictest economy, and would, in the bosom of her 
family, prove a model of every conjugal virtue. 

Although your Royal Highness has declined the alliance on 


LETTER OF MR. SINCLAIR TO THE DUKE OF CLARENCE. 95 

account of the inadequate amount of the increase proposed by 
Parliament, you are still at liberty to marry with your present 
income, and might truly state that, though you had refused the 
augmentation because it seemed to be granted ungraciously and 
with reluctance, you had nevertheless determined to enter into 
a union, which in itself appeared so auspicious, and to live upon 
your present resources. I humbly submit that such a step 
would be very popular in the country, and you might effect the 
renewal of a negociation which, if broken off, you will often 
regret; but which, if brought to a favourable conclusion, I am 
persuaded you will never repent of. If it should be thought 
necessary or desirable, my attachment and esteem for the family 
of Meiningen would supersede every consideration of private 
convenience, and I would myself repair privately to Meiningen 
and enter into such an explanation as would, I trust, remove 
every unpleasant impression. 

If your Royal Highness should be displeased at the liberty 
I have thus taken in suggesting these considerations, I beg, at 
least, to say that I am alone responsible for it—as I have written 
this letter under the impulse of my own feelings, without even 
my father’s knowledge (who is now in town), and prompted 
only by my respect for your Royal Highness, and my dutiful 
attachment towards the Princess whom I hoped to have con¬ 
gratulated as Duchess of Clarence. If I have been unduly 
officious, I must console myself with reflecting upon the good¬ 
ness of my motives, and shall always remain, with every 
sentiment of respect, 

Sir, 

Your Royal Highness’s 

Devoted and obedient Servant, 
George Sinclair. 

As the marriage, which, soon after this, took place, 
turned out to be an eminently happy union, it was 
natural that their Royal Highnesses should ever after¬ 
wards cherish a special regard for the two friends who 
had been the principal mediums through whom the union 
had been accomplished. The Duke of Clarence accord- 


9G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


ingly carried on an intimate and continuous correspond¬ 
ence with Mr. Sinclair, while the Duchess and Mrs. 
Sinclair equally carried on a correspondence between 
themselves. Of course it was of a nature less interesting 
in a public sense than that which passed between the 
Duke and Mr. Sinclair. I will therefore confine myself 
to that between his Royal Highness and Mr. Sinclair. 
I have lying before me a series of letters from the Duke 
of Clarence to Mr. Sinclair, both when his Royal High¬ 
ness bore that title, and afterwards, when he sat on the 
throne of these realms as William the Fourth, but I will, 
in this chapter, confine my extracts and references to 
the letters which his royal friend wrote to him while 
bearing the title of the Duke of Clarence. 

I may here mention, by way of preface to the letters I 
am about to transfer to my pages, that when the Duke of 
Clarence, from whose pen they proceeded, came to the 
throne of England, on the demise of George the Fourth, 
it was the prevailing impression that he not only took 
little interest in public affairs, but that he was more or 
less wanting in mental capacity to do so. This impres¬ 
sion, it will be seen, from the very first letter I shall give, 
was an erroneous one ; both in respect to the assumption 
that his Royal Highness took no interest, or a compara¬ 
tively slight one, in public affairs, and to the belief that 
he was deficient in those qualities of mind which were 
necessary to his doing so, even if he had had the disposi¬ 
tion. But in order that the first letter of the Duke of Cla¬ 
rence, which I am about to lay before the public, may be 
understood, as well as some points in other letters of his 
which will follow, it will be necessary to give a place to 
one which Mr. Sinclair addressed to the Earl of Liver- 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO LORD LIVERPOOL. 07 

pool, then Prime Minister, in relation to his Eoyal High¬ 
ness’ private affairs. This letter from Mr. Sinclair is dated 
the 2nd of May, 1819, and was written in consequence 
of one which he had just received from the Duke of 
Clarence in relation to his pecuniary embarrassments, 
which were so great as to necessitate his remaining out 
of England at the time. The letter of his Eoyal High¬ 
ness is written in a style of penmanship to which no one 
could take exception, while its orthography is correct 
throughout:— 

May 2nd, 1819. 

My Lord, 

I was yesterday honoured with the enclosed letter from his 
Eoyal Highness the Duke of Clarence, by whose commands (as 
your Lordship will see) I take the liberty to enclose it for your 
perusal. I trust I may be permitted to add a few remarks, 
explanatory of the circumstances which led to this correspon¬ 
dence. I had the honour to be very well acquainted with her 
Eoyal Highness the Duchess prior to her marriage, and have) 
both before and since, been in the habit of occasionally writing 
to both these illustrious personages : when offering to the Duke 
my tribute of condolence, on a recent melancholy frustration of 
his hopes, I used the freedom to communicate to his Eoyal 
Highness those observations which, from my situation as a 
Member of Parliament, I had made with respect to the temper 
and disposition of the present House of Commons. I stated my 
entire conviction, that it would be impolitic to ask, and impos¬ 
sible to obtain, for his Eoyal Highness, a larger grant of public 
money than the former Parliament appeared disposed to vote ; 
and T strongly recommended to the Duke that he should accept 
of the increased allowance then offered—ascribing his refusal to 
a wish, entertained by his Eoyal Highness, to have saved even 
that expense to the country, by residing abroad—and his accep¬ 
tance of it now to his anxiety, in consequence of Hanover not 
agreeing with the Duchess, to return and reside in England. I 
at the same time informed his Eoyal Highness, that these senti¬ 
ments were merely those of a humble individual; and of one 

n 


98 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

wlio, from conscientious motives, and though favourably disposed 
towards his Majesty’s Government, had been under the necessity 
of voting against the grant to his Royal brother the Duke ol 
York;—so that I might, perhaps, be biassed to overrate the 
economical disposition of the present Parliament. 

I need not take up anymore of your Lordships time, and 
shall only express my hope that, in order to facilitate the 
Duke’s return to England, for which he appears so anxious, and 
which is in many respects so desirable, a proposition, to the 
amount formerly agreed to by Parliament, may meet with the 
sanction of his Majesty’s Ministers, and the concurrence of 
the House. 

With every good wish, and sentiments of high respect, I have 
the honour to be, 

My Lord, 

Your Lordship’s obedient Servant, 
George Sinclair. 


To this letter of Mr. Sinclair, Lord Liverpool returned 
the following answer, two days after lie received it:—■ 


Sir, 


Fife House, 4tli May, 1819. 


I have had the honour of receiving your letter, together with 
the inclosure from his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence. 

I am concerned to say that I can by no means agree with 
you in the view you have taken of his Royal Highness’s 
situation. 

His Royal Highness did not object to the grant last year on 
the ground of the expense it would occasion to the country, but 
because it was wholly insufficient to enable him to maintain Ids 
station in this country , and did not place him in the same 
relative situation as even some of his younger brothers. 

I do not see, therefore, how I can in justice to his Ro} T al 
Highness, recommend him to authorise a message to be sent to 
Parliament to say that he will accept that grant which he refused 
last } 7 ear. 

No person can be more anxious for an addition to his Royal 
Highness’s income than I am. I think he is at least entitled 
to be put upon the same footing as the Duke of Kent, who has 



SECOND LETTER OF MR. SINCLAIR TO LORD LIVERPOOL. 91) 

the income of Governor of Gibraltar, in addition to the grants 
of Parliament. 

If the Duel les^i had been so fortunate as to have had a child 
who had lived, there would, I am persuaded, have been no 
difficulty in obtaining a grant to this amount. 

This, however, does not appear to be the time when any 
proposition advantageous to his Royal Highness, and at the 
same time creditable to him, could be made. 

I need scarcely add, after what I have already said, that I 
shall be most happy to take the first favourable and proper 
opportunity for furthering such a purpose. 

I have the honour to be, 

Sir, 

Your very faithful humble Servant, 
George Sinclair, Esq. LIVERPOOL. 

This letter of Lord Liverpool, as First Minister of the 
Crown, is creditable to him for the independence which 
it showed in dealing with matters which so closely con¬ 
cerned the brother of the then Prince Regent, afterwards 
George the Fourth, and himself the not improbable heir 
to the Crown at no distant day, considering the course of 
life the Prince Regent had led and was leading. One 
would hardly have expected this proof of independence, 
and regard for what was due to the nation, from one who, 
in conjunction with his colleagues, Lords Castlereagli and 
Sidmouth, suffered largely in his character as a public 
man, on account of the general belief that he was, though 
in private life an amiable and excellent man, one who 
was ever ready to assist in, or connive at, any job which 
would promote the views and gratify the wishes of any 
member of the royal family. 

To the above letter from Lord Liverpool, Mr. Sinclair 
returned the following answer, enclosing the accompany¬ 
ing memorandum :—• 

O 


> » > 


102 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


who know so well the head and heart of this amiable and excel¬ 
lent princess, must be persuaded that she will in a short time be¬ 
come a just and universal favourite with the English public; and 
another session, if she proves a mother, will induce the House 
of Commons to make her situation what it ought to be. My 
best and sincerest wishes attend Mrs. Sinclair, to whom I am 
anxious to be presented; we leave Hanover on the 17th, and I 
trust and believe the Duchess, after having the bath at Lienen- 
stein, will land in dear old England a healthier and stronger 
woman than ever. You must not be angry if I shake you by the 
hand when we meet, like an old acquaintance. In the meantime 
adieu, and ever believe me, 

Yours, sincerely, 

William. 

The subjoined letter relates to the same subject as the 
above correspondence between Lord Liverpool and Mr. 
Sinclair; namely, the national allowance to his Royal 
Highness the Duke of Clarence. It will be observed that, 
up till this time, he and Mr. Sinclair had not personally 
met. The letter is dated “ Lienenstein, July 3, 1819 ” :— 

Dear Sir, 

Though as yet personally unknown to you, I cannot address 
you under any other name for all the kindness and real friend¬ 
ship you have so uniformly shown me and the excellent 
Duchess. 

Yours of 22nd June reached me last night, and accept my 
sincere thanks for all the expressions contained in your letter, 
which do so much honour to your head and heart; if you, Sir 
James Graham, and Barton, think a moment favourable with 
Lord Liverpool, and he agrees to the measure, you have my full 
authority to take the proper steps this session for the Six Thou¬ 
sand Pounds ; but whatever may be my temporary pecuniary 
difficulty for this session, I have my reasons not to take any 
step in Parliament without the consent of Lord Liverpool ; 
equally have I the same strong objection to residing away, 
either from St. James’ or Bushy; but in our first private confi- 



LETTER FROM THE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 10.'} 


dential conversation, I will detail to you circumstances not fit 
for paper, but which I can confide to your honour; as to all the 
other parts of your letter, I agree with them entirely, and ap¬ 
prove entirely of yourself, Barton, who has my entire confidence, 
and Sir James Graham, if he will take the trouble, considering 
most fully my circumstances, and the establishment I must 
maintain : you will show this letter to Sir James and Barton. 

I would have written more fully, but my annual attack has 
left me so weak I can hardly hold my pen; the Duchess, thank 
God, is going on favourably, and the bathing agrees with her per¬ 
fectly ; she unites with me in very sincere and hearty good wishes 
towards yourself and the amiable Mrs. Sinclair. The Duchess 
of Meiningen, and all your numerous friends here, are equally 
anxious for the health and welfare of your excellent lady and 
yourself. I shall hope to hear from you shortly again. Adieu, 
and ever believe me, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours, sincerely, 

William. 

Probably few persons to be found in the same station 
of life as that which the Duke of Clarence at this 
time occupied have furnished such unmistakable proofs 
of gratitude and friendship for services rendered, as his 
Royal Highness did in his various letters for the proofs of 
friendship received from Mr. Sinclair. The following letter, 
dated “ Dunkirk, September 17, 1819/' may be quoted, 
amongst many others in lny possession, as a specimen of 
the Duke’s high appreciation of what Mr. Sinclair had 
done for himself and his Duchess, and of the profound 
estimation in which his Royal Highness held Mr. Sinclair. 
The subjoined is the letter referred to :— 

Dear Sir, 

You may be surprised at the place from whence I write; but 
the public prints will have informed you ot the melancholy event 
which has detained us here. I carry this letter myself to Dover, 
where the Duchess will enjoy the sea air and bathing. She is, 


102 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


who know so well the head and heart of this amiable and excel¬ 
lent princess, must be persuaded that she will in a short time be¬ 
come a just and universal favourite with the English public; and 
another session, if she proves a mother, will induce the House 
of Commons to make her situation what it ought to be. My 
best and sincerest wishes attend Mrs. Sinclair, to whom I am 
anxious to be presented; we leave Hanover on the 17th, and I 
trust and believe the Duchess, after having the bath at Lienen- 
stein, will land in dear old England a healthier and stronger 
woman than ever. You must not be angry if I shake you by the 
hand when we meet, like an old acquaintance. In the meantime 
adieu, and ever believe me, 

Yours, sincerely, 

William. 

The subjoined letter relates to the same subject as the 
above correspondence between Lord Liverpool and Mr. 
Sinclair; namely, the national allowance to his Royal 
Llighness the Duke of Clarence. It will be observed that, 
up till this time, he and Mr. Sinclair had not personally 
met. The letter is dated “ Lienenstein, July 3, 1819 ” :— 

Dear Sir, 

Though as yet personally unknown to you, I cannot address 
you under any other name for all the kindness and real friend¬ 
ship you have so uniformly shown me and the excellent 
Duchess. 

Yours of 22nd June reached me last night, and accept my 
sincere thanks for all the expressions contained in your letter, 
which do so much honour to your head and heart; if you. Sir 
James Graham, and Barton, think a moment favourable with 
Lord Liverpool, and he agrees to the measure, you have my full 
authority to take the proper steps this session for the Six Thou¬ 
sand Pounds ; but whatever may be my temporary pecuniary 
difficulty for this session, I have my reasons not to take any 
step in Parliament without the consent of Lord Liverpool ; 
equally have I the same strong objection to residing away, 
either from St. James’ or Bushy; but in our first private confi- 



LETTER FROM THE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 10.'} 

dential conversation, I will detail to you circumstances not fit 
for paper, but which I can confide to your honour; as to all the 
other parts of your letter, I agree with them entirely, and ap¬ 
prove entirely of yourself, Barton, who has my entire confidence, 
and Sir James Graham, if lie will take the trouble, considering 
most fully my circumstances, and the establishment I must 
maintain : you will show this letter to Sir James and Barton. 

I would have written more fully, but my annual attack has 
left me so weak I can hardly hold my pen; the Duchess, thank 
God, is going on favourably, and the bathing agrees with her per¬ 
fectly ; she unites with me in very sincere and hearty good wishes 
towards yourself and the amiable Mrs. Sinclair. The Duchess 
of Meiningen, and all your numerous friends here, are equally 
anxious for the health and welfare of your excellent lady and 
yourself. I shall hope to hear from you shortly again. Adieu, 
and ever believe me, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours, sincerely, 

William. 

Probably few persons to be found in the same station 
of life as that which the Duke of Clarence at this 
time occupied have furnished such unmistakable proofs 
of gratitude and friendship for services rendered, as his 
Royal Highness did in his various letters for the proofs of 
friendship received from Mr. Sinclair. The following letter, 
dated “ Dunkirk, September 17, 1819," may be quoted, 
amongst many others in lny possession, as a specimen of 
the Duke’s high appreciation of what Mr. Sinclair had 
done for himself and his Duchess, and of the profound 
estimation in which his Royal Highness held Mr. Sinclair. 
The subjoined is the letter referred to :—• 

Dear Sir, 

You may be surprised at the place from whence I write; but 
the public prints will have informed you of the melancholy event 
which has detained us here. I carry this letter myself to Dover, 
where the Duchess will enjoy the sea air and bathing. She is, 


101 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


thank God, as well as possible, considering her miscarriage ; and 
Dr. Halliday assures me her general health has not been im¬ 
paired, and that the causes which brought on this melancholy 
accident were her natural agitation of mind from parting with 
her mother and sister, and the bad roads, not occurring in Eng¬ 
land. He sees no reason for her not eventually becoming a 
mother of children. This sad state of things, of course, again 
throws back my expectations, and shows, if possible, the necessity 
of my following the advice of my friends greater than ever. 
Yours of 19th July, by some strange irregularity in the foreign 
post, never reached me till the 23rd of August, on the road, and 
that of 21st August I found on my arrival at Ghent: the first, 
travelling as I then was, I could not at that time answer, and 
the last I hoped to have acknowledged in a few days after its 
receipt, on my reaching Dover. However, the Duchess’s misfor¬ 
tune has detained me here some time. Your first letter was 
altogether consonant to my ideas respecting every point but that 
relative to mv children, and on this our difference was not sweat; 
but, by letters on which I can confide, and by a positive and 
direct message brought to me by Sir John Warren from the 
Regent, I have every reason to believe my brother sees my 
situation with regard to my family as I could wish. This was 
the only difficulty between the Regent and myself. I trust and 
believe our meeting and proceeding will be as formerly, and that 
the same perfect good understanding and friendship will subsist 
between us, and, indeed, be increased by the sweetness and 
agreeable company of the amiable and excellent Duchess. I 
have written twice to the Regent, consequently I have nothing 
more to say in answer to your first letter, of which I now entirely 
approve. There could never be a doubt of my entering at once 
into your ideas contained in your second letter, and I trust my 
conduct will prove me worthy of so good and excellent a wife. 
Neither ambition nor the love of money, however, influenced 
me. At my time of life I take things as they come, and, with 
the resignation and moderation of the Duchess, I flatter myself 
we shall live so as to convince the British nation that we submit 
with pleasure to the situation in which they have placed us. I 
hope and believe our way of proceeding will meet with public 
approbation. 


LETTER FROM THE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 105 

The Duchess unites with me in every sincere and hearty good 
wish towards yourself and Mrs. Sinclair, and we shall both he 
very happy to see you and your amiable lady whenever }^ou 
return to London. I shall then be able to talk over many things 
on which it is impossible to write. Adieu for the present, and 
ever believe me, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours sincerely, 

William. 

It will be observed that in the beginning of this letter 

o o 

the Duke alludes to a fact not generally known,—that 
there was at one time a prospect of an event which 
might have retained the Crown in their Royal High¬ 
nesses’ family. 

Passing over several letters, which are chiefly of a 
friendly character, the next which I shall give from the 
Duke of Clarence to Mr. Sinclair is partly in answer to 
one received from the latter, relative to some point, which 
does not appear, on which they seem to have differed. 
This letter is equally creditable to Mr. Sinclair and to his 
Royal Highness. It shows that Mr. Sinclair was no flat¬ 
terer of his royal friend, but that, on the contrary, he 
plainly expressed his opinions even when he knew that 
they differed from those of liis royal correspondent. The 
letter is no less creditable to the latter, because it shows 
his good sense in receiving in a right spirit the expression 
of views on the part of Mr. Sinclair which were at variance 
with his own. This letter is dated “ St. James’s, October 
3.1st, 1820,” and is as follows :— 

Dear Sir, 

Knowing so perfectly the sincere regard and friendship you 
have for the Duchess, me, and mine, I must thank you for your 
third letter of this day, which has just reached me. I accept 
with gratitude your advice of caution and prudence in my lan- 


IOC MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

guage. You know me, I trust, too well to think for a moment 
I can quarrel with you for differing with me in opinion on any 
political point. On the contrary, I shall always esteem that man 
who has the boldness and the openness to fairly deliver me his 
opinion whenever he and I may dissent on public measures ; 
but these points are much more fit for discussion than for writ¬ 
ing, and I hope soon after the bill is finally disposed of to have 
an opportunity of talking the matter fully over with you ; indeed, 
volumes would be requisite to state the different bearings on my 
mind. Beyond Saturday se’nnight the discussion in the Lords 
cannot last,—many think not so long, but the event will show. 
My opinion on the cool discernment of Lord Liverpool is by no 
means changed, and I look with confidence to his lordship ; but, 
once more, this subject is only fit for conversation. 

Another motive for wishing to see you is relative to the nurse 
you formerly mentioned; it is high time I should be prepared 
with a good one ; and i must request you will give me the 
necessary particulars respecting the woman you formerly men¬ 
tioned to me. I can add, with equal pleasure and truth, that the 
amiable and excellent Duchess is advancing most favourably in 
her present state ; she unites with me in every hearty good wish 
towards yourself and Mrs. Sinclair. Adieu, till we meet, which 
I hope will be shortly, and now believe me, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours unalterably, 

William. 

Omitting several letters of the Duke of Clarence in his 
correspondence with Mr. Sinclair, which were written in 
the intervening twenty months, the next one which I 
shall transfer to my pages possesses a State interest, 
because expressing the views of his Royal Highness 
respecting the intention of the then King of Prussia, the 
father of the present sovereign of that country, to annex 
the dominions of Hanover to his own dominions. It would 
appear that the incorporation of the kingdom of Hanover, 
accomplished three years ago by the present Prussian 


LETTER FROM THE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 107 


monarch, may be said to have been a traditional part of 
Prussian policy. The allusion to the then rumoured in¬ 
tention of Prussia to incorporate Gotha is also interesting. 
The letter is at once sensible and smart. It is dated— 

Bushy House, Jan. 3rd, 1822. 

Dear Sir, 

In answer to yours of 31st October, I am to observe, that 
however ill you may think of the Prussian Eagle, and whatever 
may be my ideas respecting the Prussian monarch coveting the 
dominions of Hanover, I must acquit him of all thoughts of the 
Duchy of Gotha, though, according to law, the Duke of 
Meiningen ought to succeed to the ivltole. I am inclined to 
think, to prevent serious disputes, there will be a division be¬ 
tween three, branches, which will facilitate mutual exchanges 
between the sovereign dukes. At the same time, I must ob¬ 
serve, the late Duke of Gotha certainly intended the Duke of 
Meiningen his sole heir. 

You are an excellent and sensible man, but too sceptical for 
governing any country. Our Constitution is our boast, and yet 
the very difficulty you justly mention, of Ministers being too 
much occupied in baffling their parliamentary opponents, must 
be the natural result of a representative system. I have long 
lamented the great landed interest of this empire should be in 
opposition. I have always told you I do not understand finance; 
but, both as a statesman and as a farmer, I do not see the means 
of obviating agricultural distress, either by the Legislature or 
the Cabinet. I believe the real cause to be, that our farmers 
are gentlemen, and not yeomen: at the same time, the prices of 
all grain were in Germany in the summer lower than here, and, 
I understand, in the rest of Europe. 

Dear Sir, 

' Yours sincerely, 

William. 

The next letter from the Duke of Clarence to Mr. 
Sinclair which I shall cpiote possesses no common inte¬ 
rest, because it chiefly relates to what was then the great 


108 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

question of the day, namely, agricultural distress. Seldom 
lias the country been more powerfully agitated than it 
was at this period by the prevalence and the pressure 
of that distress. Those who entertained the opinion 
before alluded to, that the Duke of Clarence had neither 
the capacity nor the disposition to apply his mind to 
the consideration of great public questions, will see by 
the following letter, principally relating to the agricul¬ 
tural distress of that day, how erroneous, though prevalent, 
that impression was. The letter is dated “ Bushy House, 
February 3, 1822. Late at night.’ 5 

Dear Sir, 

On my return last evening from Windsor, I found yours of 
the 1st instant from Himley Hall. I beg my best respects to 
the excellent, venerable, and hospitable Viscount and his lady. 
I am glad you have such excellent accounts of your amiable 
wife and lovely children. We go to-morrow to town, and return 
here on Saturday: I am anxious to hear the Speech, and what 
will be said in the House of Lords. Much is to be, and can be 
done for the agricultural interest;—we must see what Ministers 
intend. Tithes and poor’s rates might, in my opinion, be 
levied on the funded as well as on the landed property ; and 
the farmer, the grower of corn, might be protected, when the 
ports are open, by a duty on imported corn equal to our oivn — 
which pays tithes and poor’s rates. I give you my idea, and 
when we meet we can talk the matter over fully : though the 
distress of the country is great, I have very strong reason to 
believe the kingdom in general is improving, except the counties 
of Kent, Sussex, and Cumberland. The state of Ireland is very 
far from pleasant, but the accounts from thence are clearly 
exaggerated;—no permanent remedy can be found till the 
country gentlemen will reside on their estates, and encourage 
good order and civilization : w r e may, and shall, put down the 
bad spirit; but no essential good can result without the great 
landholders living, as we do in this island, on their estates. 

The Duchess is very well, and already anxious the week was 


LETTER FROM TIIE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 109 


out she might return here—in which idea I join her implicitly. 
She unites with me in every good wish for your health and wel¬ 
fare. I shall hope to see you shortly after your return home, 
and ever remain, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours sincerely, 

William. 

Another of the letters of the Duke of Clarence to Mr. 
Sinclair, which possesses general interest, because refer¬ 
ring to various topics at the time occupying much public 
attention, is dated “Bushy House, October 23,1822.” It 
was written soon after the memorable visit to Scotland 
of his brother, who by this time had become George the 
Fourth. The following is the letter :— 

Dear Sir, 

Being once more able to hold a pen, I am happy to acknow¬ 
ledge yours of lltli instant from Edinburgh. My attack on my 
return has been peculiarly unfortunate, as I was particularly 
well all the time I was out of the Kingdom. I hope and trust 
the Duchess returned materially improved in every respect by 
her continental excursion; and I can add, with great satisfac¬ 
tion, she landed in this country with sincere pleasure. I am 
glad yourself, Mrs. Sinclair, and the children are so well; the 
Duchess unites with me in every sincere wish for the continu¬ 
ance of health and prosperity to yourself and those you do and 
ought to love. 

I trust and believe the King’s visit to Scotland has answered 
in every respect; and God grant the favourable impression may 
last for ever. You and I do not often differ; and we agree 
perfectly about pageantry and state ceremonies, which are both 
state necessities. 

We certainly hear of agricultural distress, but we see nothing 
of reduction in the way of living of those who complain. 

Lord Liverpool is a very great loss; and 3 mm* remarks re¬ 
specting the effect of his death are, I am afraid, too correct. 

The Gotha succession cannot produce bloodshed, but has 
already ill-blood: however, if the Duke of Meiningen, who is 


110 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


the next heir to the present reigning imbecile wretch, will only 
be firm and moderate, the Dukes of Coburg and Hildburg- 
hausen will not be able to effect anything against the interest 
of our young friend, who by law succeeds to the whole sove¬ 
reignty. The late Duke died greatly in debt, and his daughter, 
the Duchess of Coburg, is without fortune. I do not think the 
state of either mind or body of the present Duke of Gotha can 
set him aside from the Government; it is not imagined he can 
live long, however. 

I never spoke or attempted to speak German whilst abroad ; 
but I am returned highly pleased with men, women, and things 
from Germany. Remember me kindly and particularly to Mrs. 
Sinclair,—God bless you, her, and the children,—and ever 
believe me, 

Dear Sir, 

Yours unalterably, 

William. 

Another letter is, in parts, perhaps more interest¬ 
ing, in one sense, than any of the letters to Mr. 
Sinclair from his Royal Highness which I have given. 
It is one which shows him to great advantage in various 
respects, whether viewing him as a man, as a member 
of the Legislature, or as the not improbable future 
sovereign of Great Britain,—a distinction to which, in a 
few years afterwards, he attained. Instead, however, of 
quoting it in extenso, suffice it to say that it shows how 
thoroughly opposed his Royal Highness was to the 
foreign loans which were so common in this country at 
t Hat time. lie clearly saw how great their immoral 
effect was, as well as impolitic, viewed in their relations 
to the State. He says: u these foreign loans are a 
matter of surprise to myself and others, and as contracted 
without the consent and any interference of our Govern¬ 
ment. I do not see how r the possessors of the various 


LETTER FROM THE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. Ill 

bonds can expect Ministers to interfere. I do not, how¬ 
ever, agree with you that the King of Spain is right in 
not confirming the loan : it must hurt the credit of Spain. 
I have ever seen the difficulty of our Government inter¬ 
fering with the monied men relative to foreign loans, but 
it is injurious, in my mind, to the empire, the introduc¬ 
tion of the measure of thus assisting nations with British 
capital who might turn our own money against ourselves ; 
there is, however, an observation to be made, that time 
and circumstances certainly alter things, and the Cabinet 
have, particularly during the last session, adopted mea¬ 
sures, relative to our present intercourse with the other 
nations, contrary to the received opinion of our ancestors.” 

I find another letter, dated November of the same year, 
in which his Boyal Highness answers a letter of Mr. 
Sinclair to him in favour of parliamentary reform. I 
subjoin an extract, from which it will be seen how much 
in favour of a reform in Parliament Mr. Sinclair was, and 
how much opposed to it the Duke was. “ No one,” he 
says, “ esteems you more sincerely than I do, and it is 
always with real regret I differ from you ; but on the 
point of parliamentary reform I cannot agree with you ; 
believe me confusion must and would ensue if ever reform 
of Parliament should unfortunately ever be carried; 
under no circumstances, at no period, and never mind by 
whom this measure might be brought forward, never 
ouoiit reform to be carried : it is the absolute ruin of the 

o 

country : this is my opinion on the subject. We agree 
on most points, and where we differ, I am confident we 
are animated with what appears to ourselves the real 
interest of the State. I differ entirely with Hume re¬ 
specting the policy about the fisheries; though we enjoy 


112 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


peace, and God grant it may last, yet war must at length 
inevitably come, and we ought to encourage our seamen.” 

Probably the most interesting letter altogether is that 
which is dated the 24th of March, 1826. No one, I 
venture to say, who did not know the Duke of Clarence 
in private, would have believed that he could have 
written a letter displaying so intimate a knowledge of 
the currency question, which was creating a universal 
interest at that time. Nor would it have been believed 
that, even if he had understood the subject, he could 
have expressed himself with so much clearness and force 
in the enunciation and advocacy of his views. I may 
remark in passing, that as the question of the compara¬ 
tive merits of a metallic and paper currency is about to 
excite as great an interest, if not greater, than at the date 
of the letter, it acquires a special interest at the present 
time. 


Busliy House, March 24th, 182G. 


Dear Sir, 

In answer to yours of 18th instant, I am confident you will 
very shortly hear from Admiral Otway that everything is ar¬ 
ranged concerning your prote'gd. I am glad all those you ought 
and do love are well; and the Duchess unites with me in every 
sincere and kind wish towards yourself and Mrs. Sinclair, to 
whom I beg to be particularly remembered. 

I cannot admire the new theories, and do not like the Go¬ 
vernment giving in to the Opposition, and the sort of courting 
between the two parties. We ought to have a good Govern¬ 
ment and a sound Opposition, to which the King might have 
recourse, if necessary. Steady and moderate declaration of 


sentiment on the currency and on other new points to which 
Admimstiation and Opposition are, in my opinion, heedlessly 
running, may recall the nation to its good sense, and bring fair 
discussion forward. Speculation was certainly the principal 
cause of the late commercial distress; but the evil effects of 


LETTERS FROM THE DUKE OF CLARENCE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 113 


free trade are beginning to be felt, and Baring, who is a man of 
good sense and of information, is aware he is one of those who 
encouraged ministers to their new commercial system, and was 
therefore hampered to know what to say in Parliament. Free 
trade produces speculation ; and now the difficulty is felt re¬ 
specting 'paper and metallic currency, and the commercial 
interest is forcing this new system relative to corn, which in¬ 
volves the positive existence of the landholder. Depend upon 
it, Government will find their difficulties increase by their free 
trade; and I am most seriously alarmed at the decrease of our 
seamen and the consequent increase of foreigners. I believe 
Scotland cannot go on without paper, and I much doubt Ireland 
can; but look to the consequence of the alteration in the coni 
laics , if connected with the withdrawing paper in Ireland, what 
will become of the sister kingdom, now emerging, by its corn 
being imported into this island which it grows through the 
medium of its paper ? I had really been in hopes that, except 
in religion, all sides were uniting as to the other proper means 
of encouraging Ireland. But free trade must hurt the corn and 
linen. Yet I believe the ins and outs mean well. But I can¬ 
not approve of theory against practice of so many years’ stand¬ 
ing. I shall tire you, and therefore remain, 

Yours sincerely, 

William. 

Throughout the letters of the Duke of Clarence, we see 
indications, not to be mistaken, of his dislike to Roman 
Catholicism. In one letter he is somewhat jocular at 
the expense of the popes. Deferring to the election of 
one, in 1823, when Leo the Twelfth was chosen to fill 
the papal chair, he says:—“ They have got a Leo the 
Twelfth, and I did not expect any more popes. I thought 
Austria would not have permitted another election; but 
being now seated in the papal chair, I wish he may 
remain there quietly for a length of time. What would 
I give to see but one old lady a Catholic in Ireland.” 

In another letter, written about the same time, we 



114 


MEMOIRS OF SJR OEOIIGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


find as sound judgment and good sense as could be met 
with anywhere. Mr. Sinclair, like his father, Sir John, 
had carefully studied, and thoroughly understood, the 
subject of the currency, which was at that time, owing 
to the recent passing of Peel’s Currency Bill, exciting 
great and universal attention in the country. Mr. Sin¬ 
clair had evidently been asking the opinion of his Royal 
Highness on some phase of the question, for we find the 
latter expressing himself thus in relation to it: — 

I will never venture an opinion in a matter I do not under¬ 
stand. Finance is out of my way. I am glad you, who do 
understand this intricate subject, are satisfied with the Chan¬ 
cellor of the Exchequer. 

Both Bobinson and Peel rise in public estimation. But I 
clearly see and rejoice at the increasing prosperity of the empire. 
It may be, and must he, slow ; but I really think the present 
measures pursuing in Ireland will ultimately and permanently 
tranquillize that country. I dread for the West Indies, unless 
the Cabinet stand firm against Wilberforce and his associates. 
Believe me, religion has nothing to do with politics ; they must, 
and ought, ever to be separated. I shall ever be happy to shake 
you by the hand wherever we meet, and trust you will not stop 
at Edinburgh, but reach London. However, you and I have the 
good sense to make ourselves contented with our lots wherever 
we are placed. 

What a happy thing it would be for individuals, and 
for the world at large, if everyone not only adopted, but 
uniformly acted on, the latter sentiment,—that of making 
ourselves contented with our lot wherever we may be 



The opinions, on great public questions, of one who 
was, when he expressed them, so near to the throne of 
England as was the Duke of Clarence at the period to 
which his latter letters refer, will be read with interest 


VIEWS OF THE DUKE OF CLARENCE ON IRISH AFFAIRS. 115 

still. On the subject of the emancipation of the West 
India slaves, in connection with the agitation then so 
vigorously carried on for their manumission, Mr. Sinclair’s 
royal correspondent thus wrote :—“ As far,” he says, “ as 
relates to Ireland, the session has done a vast deal of 
good : and the more the sister kingdom is discussed, 
decidedly the better for the country, and consequently 
for the empire. But the West Indies ought never to be 
mentioned. It Wilberforce and the saints continue their 
lamentable, dangerous, and ill-judged language and 
motions in Parliament, every European man, woman, 
and child will be murdered by the blacks. Beligion is 
requisite to govern mankind. But philosophy and reli¬ 
gion, mixed with politics, will not do, and only can, and 
must, throw governments into utter confusion. I will 
not say another word on the West Indies. I admire dis¬ 
cussion, and shall never think the worse of you for 
differing; from me.” 

The frightful prediction that the emancipation of the 
slaves, if the measure should be carried, would be fol¬ 
lowed by the murder, by the blacks, of “ every European 
man, woman, and child,” was, happily, not fulfilled. So 
far from all the Europeans in the West Indies being 
massacred on the passing of the measure, not one 
European lost his life at the hands of the blacks. 

The Duke of Clarence, at this time, repeatedly ex¬ 
presses his views on the Irish difficulty, which seems to 
have been as great as now. He says, in one letter, “ The 
more Ireland is discussed in Parliament, in my opinion, 
the better for the sister kingdom, and consequently for the 
empire at large. Education may withdraw the low and 
ignorant Irish from the absolute sway of their priests, 



11G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 

which must he an object with all those who wish the 
tranquillity of that country. Government must not force 
improvement in Ireland, but leave it, as Canning wisely 
stated, to individuals to feel their own progressive way 
in advancing in whatever may contribute, in their diffe¬ 
rent ideas and manner, towards the various points of 
commerce and agriculture wanted in a country so pecu¬ 
liarly situated. On the point of religion, people are so 
divided, I cannot venture an opinion.” 

It was, if I remember rightly, in 1835, that Mr. Sheil, 
then the most popular Irish member, next to Mr. O’Con¬ 
nell, in the House of Commons, said, with great energy, 
looking at Sir Robert Peel, then Prime Minister, that Ire¬ 
land would prove the grave of his Administration. And 
such was the fact. On the Appropriation Principle, the 
Ministry of Sir Robert Peel were defeated, and resigned in 
consequence. At the time to which the next letter of the 
Duke alludes, the Ministry of Lord Siclmoutli was placed 
in peril by the Irish question. His Royal Highness says : 
“ However highly I must appreciate the Chancellor and 
his brother, and Lord Sidmouth, yet these three great 
men think of Ireland as they did when at Oxford, in the 
reign of George the Second. The Cabinet is hampered 
by them : this is clear, and on the other points there may 
be differences amongst ourselves. I think you have 
drawn the Chancellor to perfection.” The Chancellor 
referred to was Lord Eldon, and his brother was Lord 
Stowell,—the latter one of the best judges that ever 
sat on the English bench. 

I find another letter, written about this period, by the 
Duke of Clarence, in which he expresses himself in terms 
of decided disapproval of free trade in all its phases. 



T1IE DUKE OF CLARENCE ON FREE TRADE. 


117 


The following extract from this letter will be read with 
special interest at the present time, when a movement 
has been set afoot, and has made some progress, to obtain 
a considerable modification, if not an entire repeal, of the 
free-trade measures passed some years ago:—“ You do 
me but justice,” says the Duke, “ in believing my 
thorough attachment to our native land, and its real inte¬ 
rests. I may err from the head , but I cannot from the 
heart . I agree with you in the general prosperity of the 
empire, and in the likelihood of the continuance of peace. 
But I see with concern the attempt of some to set Pro¬ 
testant Great Britain versus Catholic Ireland , and I 
trust Mr. Huskisson, urged on by Mr. Bolton of Liver¬ 
pool, and Mr. Wallace, stimulated by Mr. Hall, the great 
speculator, of London, may not bring the Agricultural 
interest of the United Kingdoms in direct opposition to 
the Commercial ideas by endeavouring to alter the Corn- 
laws. Equally do I dread Messrs. Huskisson and Wal¬ 
lace, under the influence of Messrs. Bolton and Hall, 
throwing the carrying trade into the hands of foreigners, 
and reducing the nursery for our seamen, under the plea 
of increasing the revenue and the manufactures. We 

O 

cannot for ever remain at peace, and I dread the want of 
seamen in a future war by encouraging the smaller vessels 
of foreigners. Other nations can never cope with us in 
long voyages. It is the coasting trade, and the imme¬ 
diate introduction of small and light draft of water 
vessels, that I apprehend will peculiarly injure the 
education of apprentices at sea.” 

Whether right or wrong in his views on the ques¬ 
tion of free trade, it must be admitted that he thought 

* 

more on that question, and wrote more intelligently on 


118 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

it, than most people gave him credit for being able 
to do. 

The question of a paper currency is another which is 
likely to be brought prominently before Parliament, as it 
is already occupying the attention of the country. The 
views of the Duke of Clarence on that question I find 
expressed in a letter to Mr. Sinclair, under date of March 
the 4th, 1826. He says: “I do not see how England, 
and especially Scotland, can go on without paper cur¬ 
rency : at the same time nothing has so facilitated the 
infamous speculation which has produced the present 
panic as the excessive and improper fabrication of paper 
in small notes by the country bankers. Government are 
right in allowing three years for the experiment, and 
probably in the course of that time the means may be 
found to limit the extent of issue of small notes. The 
small farmer and little tradesman in the country cannot, 
in my opinion, go on without a proportion of small notes. 
Scotland and Ireland require consideration, as they are 
both different from England, and the minister is aware 
of this. Still, however, with all the liability and facility 
to speculation, I do not conceive the United Kingdoms 
can carry on their usual social intercourse without a 
quantum of small notes. Unfortunately, new theories 
are the fashion, and I only hope this spirit of innovation 
may not injure the vital interests of the empire. In 1830, 
the Bank Charter expires, and it is considered probable 
it will not be renewed. I am anxious to know in what 
manner the public money will be disposed. But these 
things are more for conversation than for letters. It 
proves, however, you and I have the interest of the 
country seriously at heart/’ 


PENMANSHIP OF THE DUKE OF CLARENCE. 


119 


Various other letters from his Eoyal Highness the 
Duke of Clarence, written to Mr. Sinclair, are in my 
possession ; but as they are letters more expressive of the 
very sincere friendship which he felt for the subject of 
these Memoirs, than of references to the great political 
questions of the day, I pass them over, especially as the 
date of the last letter I have given was within a few years 
of the royal writer succeeding to the Crown of England, and 
when consequently, I will have to speak of him no longer 
as the Duke of Clarence, but as the Sovereign of Great 


Britain and Ireland. This he became, under the title 
of William the Fourth, at the death, on June 26th, 1830, 
of his brother, George the Fourth. I will content myself 
here with relating a brief anecdote connected with the 
accession of the Duke of Clarence to the Crown of these 
realms, which Mr. Sinclair, after my intimate acquaint¬ 
ance with him as Sir George Sinclair, used to relate to 
me. A friend was the first to apprise Mr. Sinclair of 
the fact of George the Fourth’s death; and he did it in 
these words : “ Your friend , the Duke of Clarence, is 
King;' To this Mr. Sinclair, on the spur of the moment, 
with that ready repartee in which he so signally excelled, 
replied, “But is the King my friend ?” There was a 
happy combination of wit and philosophy in this response 
to the announcement that the Duke of Clarence had been 
raised to the Throne of these realms. 

It may lie interesting to mention that, though I have 
sixty or seventy of the Duke’s letters to Mr. Sinclair now 
before me, 1 do not find a single instance in one of the 
number of an erasure or interlineation. The only parallel 
case of the kind which has ever come under my own special 
observation, was that of the late Sir James Graham. The 


120 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


late Sir Charles Napier gave me, soon after his return 
from the command of the Baltic fleet, in the time of the 
Crimean war, a perusal of all his correspondence with Sir 
James Graham, as First Lord of the Admiralty; and out 
of about fifty letters and despatches written by Sir James, 
there was not a single erasure or interlineation. This is 
a fact which, I imagine, is of very rare occurrence. 


CHAPTEE VI. 


Mr. Sinclair’s Speeches in Parliament — His Scientific Pursuits — Literary 
Efforts and Poetic tastes—Early Aristocratic Friends — The Duke of 
Gordon—The Duchess of Gordon and Mr. Pitt—Lord Fife—Lord Glenelg 
—Lord Ward. 


Probably no man that ever sat in the House of 
Commons could boast of superior literary attainments or 
more varied intellectual knowledge than were possessed 
by Mr. Sinclair; but it is no uncommon thing for a man 
to be and to possess all this, and yet not to enjoy the 
reputation for it to which he is entitled. This was not 
the experience of Mr. Sinclair. He not only was, but 
was known and admitted to be, the most accomplished 
man in either of the several Parliaments of which he was 
a member. When I mention this fact, no one will feel 
surprised on my adding that whenever it was known that 
he was to make one of his great speeches, the House was 
sure to be filled with members anxious to hear him. 
Nothing, indeed, on such occasions, but some unavoidable 
cause would have prevented any of the more intellectual • 
members from being present. If he did not speak often, 
he made up for the unfrequency of his speeches—un¬ 
frequency, I mean, as compared with other members who 
were nightly on their legs—by the quality of his matter, 
and the faultless beauty of his style. Some of Mr. Sin- 




122 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


clair’s speeches, indeed, created quite a sensation; but 
probably no address lie ever delivered within the walls of 
St. Stephen’s elicited so marked a display of admiration 
in the House, or made a deeper or more abiding impres¬ 
sion in the country when read, than did his memorable 
speech on the condition of the working classes, in the 
year 1828. The distress in the country was at that time 
not only deep, but universal. “ National distress,” and 
proofs and illustrations of its existence and universality, 
with endless prescriptions for its cure, everywhere met 
the eye whenever any one opened, the pages of the news¬ 
papers of the period. Again and again, the question was 
brought before Parliament, and prolonged and exciting 
debates took place in relation to the best mode of dealing 
with it. On one of these occasions, when none but the 
most influential men would be heard on the subject, Mr. 
Sinclair addressed the House at considerable length. 
There was but one opinion with relation to the character 
of his speech. The House was charmed with it,—in¬ 
deed, was carried away captive by it. It abounded with 
argument and wit in pretty equal proportions ; while it 
was pervaded by a love of justice and a sympathy for the 
suffering lower classes, which have rarely been found 
in unison in either House of Parliament. It was in 
the highest sense of the term a great speech. It was 
universally acknowledged, equally within and without 
the walls of Parliament, to be a brilliant intellectual 
achievement. 

I wish that the plan of my work allowed me to make 
copious quotations from a speech, characterised alike 
by enlightened statesmanship and transcendent eloquence. 
But I am not, as regards space, a free agent. So far from 


SPEECH IN PARLIAMENT BY MR. SINCLAIR. 


123 


being poor in relation to materials, I am encumbered by 
their affluence. I can only, therefore, transfer to my 
pages a few passages as samples of Mr. Sinclair’s sym¬ 
pathy with the sufferings and sorrows of the industrial 
classes, and of the wit, the argument, the eloquence, 
which characterised the celebrated speech to which I 
refer. It was delivered at a time when myriads of our 
weavers and other operatives in the manufacturing dis¬ 
tricts were either entirely out of employment, or only 
partially employed ; and when their own starvation, and 
that of their families, led hand-loom weavers in many 
instances to the breaking of frames, and the committing 
of other acts of violence. Mingled with his sympathy 
for them, there was blended in Mr. Sinclair’s remarkable 
speech a bold and unsparing censure of those in the higher 
classes of society who, entirely wrapped up in selfishness, 
had no feeling for their utter destitution, their intolerable 
distress. Mr. Sinclair said :— 

How many honest and respectable fathers of families are at 
issue with those who maintain that the present system is work¬ 
ing well! It does so undoubtedly, as far as the Court and the 
persons who subsist on the taxes are concerned. It is well 
adapted to further the interests of all who have realised or 
inherited large incomes, or who can secure preferment for their 
brothers, promotion for their uncles, legations for their children, 
pensions for their widows, or power, and place, and patronage 
for themselves. None of us are gratuitous eulogists of things 
as they are. We never know what it is to want; we never 
devote one hour to those harassing occupations by which the 
lives of millions are embittered and abridged. It is, indeed, 
often asserted that our duties are multifarious and fatiguing, 
but we can at pleasure modify, suspend, or relinquish them. 
The privileges and recreations of the legislator are as numerous 
as the privations and hardships of the labourer are intense. The 
former can retire from his sphere of exertion whenever it suits 



121 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


his convenience or caprice, to take his ride in the Park, or his 
rubber at Crockford’s, or enjoy a hebdomadal “ feast of reason 
and flow of soul ” at Grillon’s. The latter must perform the 
daily routine of his drudgery without any alternative, and is a 
stranger to the resource of pairing off for the night or retiring 
to enjoy rural leisure for the week. We participate in all the 
refinements and embellishments devised by modern ingenuity. 
We all expect that we shall this evening retire to comfortable 
places of abode, where those whom we love are surrounded by 
all the conveniences and most of the luxuries of life. But what 
shall we say with respect to the destitute hand-loom weavers 
and the hundreds of thousands throughout the manufacturing 
districts, “ subject to like passions as we are,” and as anxious as 
we possibly can be for the welfare and the comfort of their 
offspring, who, long ere morning’s dawn, are summoned to unre¬ 
mitting, unhealthy, and unprofitable toil, or perhaps are cut off 
from obtaining employment at all ; who have no other prospect 
than of returning at a late hour of the night to their forlorn 


and cheerless homes in a state of bodily exhaustion and mental 
despondency; and who can bequeath no legacy to their children 
but a career as wretched as their own ? Is it consistent with 
reason or common sense that persons so circumstanced should 
feel any strong attachments to the institutions under which they 
live—or, ought I not rather to say, under which they are doomed 
to pine in unrelieved and unpitied wretchedness ? And may it 
not sometimes occur to them, however erroneously, that those 
who have nothing to lose may have something to gain, even 
through the appalling medium of anarchy and civil discord ? 
If a feeling of desperation and a thirst for vengeance should 
impel them to deeds of violence, and that some modern Menenius 
should say to them, “ Will you undo yourselves ? ”—might they 
not rejDly, in the simple and appropriate language of the Roman 
citizen, “ We cannot, sir ; we are undone already.” And to what 
quarter can they look for compassion ? From whence are they 
to hope for assistance ? To transmit their complaints to the 
House is an empty ceremony, and a vain delusion ; as well 
might they address themselves to the Congress at Washington, 
to the Chamber of Deputies at Paris, or to the Cortes assembled 
at Madrid. 


SPEECH IN PARLIAMENT BY MR. SINCLAIR. 


125 


Nothing could he more racy, nothing more pungent, 
than the following passage from this speech of Mr. 
Sinclair, where he describes, in a manner singularly 
graphic, the conversation which he had on one occasion, 
at dinner, with an aristocratic spinster, in relation to the 
condition of the working classes, at the period which lie 
mentions. 

I have often listened with indignation and disgust to the 
colloquial homilies of selfish affluence. How triumphantly does 
the bloated sensualist, who encumbers his lordly board and 
stimulates his languid appetite by an endlessly diversified array 
of costly viands, and who is, perhaps, in secret addicted to prac¬ 
tices more flagrant in the sight of God, indulge in a pathetic 
invective against crimes, which his unearned hereditary opu¬ 
lence has placed him beyond the temptation of committing, 
and to which the poor are only impelled by destitution, 
neglect, and despair! Away with such easy eloquence— 
such nauseous cant—such cheap morality ! Nothing is more 
common or less difficult than to paint the vices of others in 
the most glowing colours, or to endure their sorrows and wit¬ 
ness their sufferings with the most exemplary resignation. I 
had the honour, some years ago, to sit at dinner next to a very 
prim, somewhat antiquated, liigldy-respectable spinster, deeply 
interested in the fluctuations of the three per cents, and of the 
quadrille table, and who, in the society of a sleek and snarling 
lap-dog, feasted on all the delicacies of all the seasons. Whilst 
she was enjoying, quite con amove , a well-replenished plate of 
rich and savoury turtle soup, allusion was made to the disturb¬ 
ances then raging in certain districts, where the working classes 
had been driven, by want of employment for themselves and of 
sustenance for their families, to perpetrate acts of violence and 
intimidation. My fair neighbour shrugged up her shoulders, 
turned up the whites of her eyes, and, during the brief intervals 
from self-complacent deglutition, exclaimed, “ Oh, sir, national 
unthankfulness is a very heinous sin ! How multiplied are the 
benefits which a gracious Providence is daily showering down 
upon us, the unreasonable inhabitants of this highly-favoured 


120 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


land ! I wish I could only expostulate in person with our mis¬ 
guided and unthinking countrymen themselves ; I should ask 
them whether it would be decent, or even jiossible, to pray for 
a larger measure of comforts than w T e actually receive? 

“ Champagne, ma’am ? ” “ If you please. But, sir,” continued 

she, whilst the butler was pouring a bumper of Vin (V Ay into 
a long capacious glass, “ I blush to think of the return which 
we are making for mercies, of which we are very unworthy ! Is 
it not awful and melancholy to consider ”—here she drank off 
her wine, which was remarkably well iced—“ that perhaps at 
this very moment, by way of requital for all our blessings, we are 
committing outrages and breaking frames ? I declare, when one 
reflects upon such horrid infatuation, it makes one’s flesh creep 
from head to foot, lest, as a just chastisement for all our crimes, 
we should, in the twinkling of an eye, be deprived of all our 
comforts—may I trouble you for another spoonful of the green 
fat ? ” In connection with this good lady’s admonitory lamenta¬ 
tions, there were two elements which she altogether overlooked. 
In the first place, she omitted to remember that, if by some 
lucky windfall or providential dispensation, the most reckless of 
these unhappy delinquents had come into possession of a fortune 
equivalent to the hundredth part of the mercies which she 
enjoyed with so keen a relish, and prized with so exemplary a 
thankfulness, he would have vied with herself in the loudness of 
his encomiums on the benefits resulting from tranquillity and 
subordination. In fact, riches and radicalism, though not in¬ 
variably incompatible, very seldom go hand in hand. I am 
persuaded that many a blustering political fire-eater would be 
thoroughly cured of all his levelling crotchets and revolutionary 
vagaries, by opportunely marrying a dashing widow and partici¬ 
pating in the usufruct of a well-paid jointure, or by unexpectedly 
burying an inconvenient uncle, who, in the capacity of rightful 
owner, was the only bar to his entrance upon the enjoyment of a 
title and estate. On the other hand, my worthy friend plumed 
herself upon being what would now be termed a staunch Con¬ 
servative, and a decided enemy to all innovation, both religious 
and political. But no principle was so predominant in her creed 
as a mortal antipathy to the income-tax, her chief objection to 
which was the great difficulty of evading it. She had, fortunately, 


SPEECH IN PARLIAMENT BY MR. SINCLAIR. 


127 


lived long enough to see it abolished, an event which delighted 
her much more than the triumphs of Waterloo or Trafalgar ; and 
in defiance of the old adage, de mortuis nil nisi bonum, she was 
constantly directing against its manes the whole artillery of her 
eloquence. Nov/, if the Duke of Wellington himself, whom she 
often pronounced to be the most consummate statesman, as well 
as the greatest captain, of the age, had evoked the grim spectre 
of that grinding impost from its tomb, I do not say that her 
arms would have been employed in destroying frames, but her 
tongue would have been constantly levelling at his Grace the 
most envenomed shafts of vituperation, and all her dependants 
would have been marshalled, with herself as generalissimo 
at their head, to support Opposition candidates at the next 
general election. 

The following is the peroration of Mr. Sinclair s speech. 
It is characterised alike by its feeling for those who were 
the victims of the deep distress which prevailed at the 
period at which it was delivered, and by the sound philo¬ 
sophy which marked its suggestions as to the way in 
which the working classes ought to be legislated for by 
Parliament. 

We may rest assured that sufferers whose passions are in¬ 
flamed, or whose spirits are broken, by physical hardships and 
privations, consider political privileges and abstract rights as a 
very slender source of consolation or indemnity. It is useless to 
remind those who are receiving seven shillings a week in ex¬ 
change for their labour that they have the benefit of trial by 
jury. It is insulting to impress upon the mechanic, when dis¬ 
heartened and enfeebled by excessive toil, that he is entitled to 
the freedom of the press ; and we can scarcely expect that men 
will be punctual in their Sabbath-day devotions and observances 
when their tempers have been soured, their intellects stupified, 
and their strength exhausted by the incessant drudgery of the 
preceding week. Although I am sure that the industrious 
classes may be soothed and satisfied if we adopt such a system 
as shall ameliorate their condition, the consequences must, I 


128 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


fear, be most awful if, whilst laudably engaged in devising 
means.for the protection of Hottentots, Hindoos, and Hill- 
coolies, we any longer consign so large a proportion of our fel¬ 
low citizens to a state of ignorance, bondage, degradation, and 
distress. 

These are a few specimens of a speech alike remarkable 
for its humanity, its moral courage, the pungency of its 
satire, and its eloquence. Rarely has the legislature of 
the land had so large an amount of wholesome and 
urgently-needed truth addressed to it, than was spoken 
to it on this occasion by one who, in an eminent degree, 
combined in his own person the qualities of a patriot and 
philanthropist. No wonder though such a speech, so 
novel, as well as so just in many of its severest strictures, 
should have created a sensation among the assembly to 
whom it was addressed ; nor can we marvel that a speech 
which read so beautifully when published—which, indeed, 
all Mr. Sinclair s speeches when correctly reported did— 
should have excited universal admiration in the country, 
mingled with the most profound gratitude to the speaker, 
on the part of those whose cause he so feelingly, so ably, 
and so eloquently advocated. 

But it was not on the occasion of the delivery of this 
speech alone that Mr. Sinclair was admired and applauded 
by a crowded House. He was always received, when lie 
rose to speak, with a marked attention, which indicated 
the high respect in which both personally, and as a man 
of no ordinary intellectual acquirements, he was held by 
all who could appreciate mental culture of no common 
kind, in unison with the high personal character for which 
Mr. Sinclair was remarkable. And here let me say, 
in justice alike to the House of Commons, and as an 



ATTENDS PHILOSOPHICAL AND SCIENTIFIC CLASSES. 12U 

encouragement to men of high personal character, that, 
knowing as I do a good deal of the various Parlia¬ 
ments since the passing of the Reform Bill of 1832, I 
have never yet known an instance in which a member 
who had reached a high standard of moral worth was 
not held in much esteem by the House of Commons, as 
well as by the public generally. 

But though a Member of Parliament at this period of 
his life, and not only taking an active part in legislative 
matters, but commanding the admiration of a “ listening 
senate,” Mr. Sinclair, during his residence in Edinburgh, 
attended, in the capacity of an ordinary student, several 
of the more advanced philosophical and scientific classes 
in the University. So great was his thirst for knowledge 
in all its varied forms, that he regularly attended, among 
others, the lectures of Dr. Hope on Chemistry, those 
of Dr. Knox and Dr. Monro on Anatomy, and also 
a course of lectures on Botany. To the professional 
students in each of these branches of philosophy and 
science, Mr. Sinclair was not only courteous but kind, 
and they in return regarded him with mingled feelings 
of friendship and admiration. He returned from his 
attendance on these and other lectures with a face 
radiant with delight, and used to say that he was never 
so happy in his life as when his legislative duties ad¬ 
mitted of his residence in Edinburgh, and consequently 
of his being present at the lectures on philosophy and 
science to which I have alluded. 

I may here remark in passing, that the Dr. Knox, 
whose classes on anatomy Mr. Sinclair attended while 
a Member of Parliament, was the Dr. Knox who, up¬ 
wards of forty years ago, acquired such an unenviable. 


180 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


notoriety in connection with the murders committed by 
Burke and Hare, in order to procure him, for a certain 
sum, subjects for his anatomical pursuits. His house was 
attacked by the populace, and he himself was obliged to 
flee for his life. It was believed that he connived at 
these murders, instead of believing Burke and Hare to be 
simply resurrection men. On that point I express no 
opinion, because I have no means of forming one. When 
public indignation in Edinburgh had somewhat subsided, 
Mr. Sinclair used to tell the story of each of his servants 
refusing to open alone the door to Dr. Knox. They would 
only do so when two of them went together,—their fear 
being that anyone opening the door singly would be 
“ Burked/’ He was allowed, by universal consent, to be 
the ugliest man in the United Kingdom,—a fact of which 
he used to speak playfully. But if no one could surpass 
him in the hideousness of his countenance, he was pro¬ 
bably the greatest anatomist the world ever produced. 
Young men came not only from all parts of the British 
empire to study under him, but from all parts of the 
civilised world; and I remember his mentioning to me, 
towards the close of the Crimean war, when speaking of 
the number of young men who had distinguished them¬ 
selves by their humane, their devoted, and skilful services 
in ministering to the necessities of the wounded on the 
field of battle, that many of them had been students 
under him, and that he believed fully three-fourths of 
those, whether in the army, or practising as surgeons in 
various parts of the country and our colonies, and who 
had acquired a high reputation in their profession,—had 
been brought up under him. 

But this is a slight digression. While Mr. Sinclair 





“ LIST OF SCARCE BOOKS.” 


iai 


thus, as an amateur, attended philosophical and scientific 
classes in Edinburgh, on a footing of equality with pro¬ 
fessional students, while a married man and a Member of 
Parliament,—he was not insensible to the charms of 
general literature. On the contrary, his was a practised 
pen in well-nigh every department of the belles lettres. 
Many of his pieces, embracing the extremes of grave and 
gay, of poetry and prose, were published at the time in 
the various journals of the day, and in diversified forms 
of literature, but the great majority was never published. 
His exceeding modesty, and humble estimate of his own 
intellectual capacity, led him to limit to the circle of his 
personal friends the knowledge of many things of a very 
high order of merit, which he wrote. I could fill many 
pages of this volume with specimens of what Mr. Sinclair 
wrote under these circumstances, and I regard it as 
a matter of deep regret that so few of them should have 
seen the light of day. But my materials for the size of 
the work, to which it has been arranged from the first 
it should be limited, forbid my here transferring to my 
pages more than two exemplifications of what I have just 
stated. The first is entitled “ List of Scarce Books,” and 
is an exceedingly happy jeu cVesprit. There is written 
on the back of the MS. the name of “ William Bosville, 
Esq.” Mr. Bosville was Mr. Sinclair’s great-uncle. The 
following is the 


LIST OF SCARCE BOOKS. 

Copernicus’s Hints on Hackney Coaches in a Letter to Arch¬ 
bishop Tillotson. 

Noah on Transubstantiation, with Notes by Diodorus Siculus. 
Sir Isaac Newton’s Court Guide for 1812. 

Macdonald on Maccabees. 



132 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART, 


Tuffen on Timothy, James on Jonas, Curran on Canticles, Este 
on Esther. 

Sinclair on the Second Book of Samuel, and Bosville on Bel and 
the Dragon. Folio, 6 vols. 

Marcus Aurelius’s Complete Art of Cookery. 10 vols, 4 to. 

Xenophon’s Travels in Cochin-China. 

Virgil’s Dryden, and Homer’s Translation of Pope’s Iliad. 

Tooke’s Collects for Every Day in the Year. 

Mayne on Materialism, and Bosville on Burnt Offerings. 

Silius Italicus on the Diabetes. 

A Reply to Ditto by Sir Walter Raleigh. 

Mark Antony on Catholic Emancipation. 

Twelve Dying Speeches of Remarkable Malefactors, collected 
by Hermes Trismegistus. 

Confucius’s Refutation of Antipsedo-baptism. 

Aristotle’s Bath Guide, with a View of the Pump-room by Paul 
Veronese. 

Isocrates on the Tendency of Country Banks. 

Theopompus on Theophilanthropism. 

Caleb Quotum on Church Preferment. 

Dr. Jerome on-, with Cuts. 

Parr’s Commentary on the Lost Books of Livy. 

Bentivoglio on Benefit Societies. 

Bosville’s Letter to the Right Honourable George Rose on the 
Necessity of Doubling the National Debt. 

Bosville’s Defence of Missionaries against the Calumnies of the 
Society for the Suppression of Vice. 

Beaumont’s Theory of Hydraulics, with a Dissertation on the 
Influence of the Moon on Vegetation. 

Miltiades on Military Discipline. 

Maynes’s Tears of Lusitania ; an Epic Poem in Forty Books. 

Sinclair (George) on the Importance of Sparrow’s Dung as a 
Manure. 

Barbarossa on Broad-wheeled Waggons. 

Este on the Nolo Episcopari. 

A Speech intended to have been Spoken at the British Forum 
by Robinson Crusoe on the Alarming State of the Times. 

Plutarch on the Plagiarism of the Moderns. 

Methusalem’s Translation of Ovid’s Metamorphoses into Cop- 



WEALTH OF THE APOSTLES AND THE IRISH BISHOPS. 133 

tic, with Critical Remarks by the Honourable Colonel 
Hanger. 

Gray’s Elegy in Coptic, by Weston. 

At the time the question of the wealth, and the abuses 
connected with it, of the Irish bishops, contrasted with 
the condition of the inferior clergy, was creating great 
interest in the public mind, the dignitaries of the Church 
were boldly,—certainly most imprudently,—proclaiming 
themselves to be, and priding themselves on the assumed 
fact, successors of the Apostles. Mr. Sinclair took them 
on their own terms, and in the most triumphant manner 
made themselves and their ecclesiastical pretensions alike 
ridiculous. After some preliminary observations, Mr. 
Sinclair thus proceeded :— 

If, during the laborious and successful excavations of enter¬ 
prising Oriental explorers, a brazen tablet were dug up, which, 
when deciphered and translated, and the sums represented by 
modern equivalents, proclaimed the following notabilia :— 

WEALTH OF THE APOSTLES. 


Probate of their Wills. 


Matthew 

. £400,000 

Simon the Canaanite 

. . 150,000 

Lebbeus 

. 100,000 

James the Less 

. . 300,000 

Paul .... 

. 200,000 

John .... 

. . 150,000 

Peter .... 

. 250,000 

Andrew .... 

. . 150,000 

Making a total of 

£1,700,000 


If such a discovery of the wills of the Apostles were made, 
the obvious inference would generally be deduced, that tire 






134 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


public announcement of their having amassed such enormous 
amounts of ‘ filthy lucre ’ must, in no small degree, have hardened 
their hearers against the more impressive exhortations to set 
their affections on things above, and not to lay up for them¬ 
selves treasures upon earth. A similar result will, I doubt not, 
ensue wherever the subjoined short but significant paragraph is 
read by acute and impartial inquirers, in reference to certain 
dignitaries, professing to be the rightful and indefeasible suc¬ 
cessors of the ' twelve ’ whose disinterestedness and self-denial 
were as conspicuous as their sanctity and their success. 

WEALTH OF THE IRISH BISHOPS. 

Probate of Irish-Protestant Bishops' 1 Wills. 


Agar, Archbishop of Cashel . . . £400,000 

Porter, Bishop of Clogher . . . 250,000 

Knox, Bishop of Killaloe . . . 100,000 

Stuart, Archbishop of Armagh . . 300,000 

Hawkins, Bishop of Raphoe . . . 250,000 

Fowler, Archbishop of Dublin . . 150,000 

Beresford, Archbishop of Tuam . . 250,000 


Total .... £1,700,000 


Mr. Sinclair added to this assumed sameness between 
the wealth of the Apostles and that of the Irish bishops— 
whose names are not imaginary, but, like their sees, are 
real—the following grave remark “ One hundred thou¬ 
sand copies of this plain and pithy document would, I am 
persuaded, if dispersed amongst our Church-neglecting mul¬ 
titudes, have a far more powerful tendency to strengthen 
them in their infidelity than the circulation of twice as 
many Bibles to remove it.” I beg to endorse the belief 
thus expressed by Mr. Sinclair, and feel assured that 
every one who has paid attention to the subject will do 
the same. 






THE DUKE OF GORDON. 


135 


Among the noble acquaintances of Mr. Sinclair at the 
time and soon after he entered Parliament, there was 
one who was regarded by the whole of the North of 
Scotland as the greatest of all the ducal celebrities of his 
day. I allude to the Duke of Gordon. In England it 
would be difficult to form a sufficiently high opinion of 
the estimation in which he was held by the people of the 
Scottish northern counties. Even the Sovereign himself 
on the Throne was scarcely to be compared, in their view, 
with his Grace of Gordon Castle,—liis seat on the banks 
of the Spey, which river divides the counties of Moray 
and Banff. Gordon Castle is situated, as nearly as may 
be, midway between Aberdeen and Inverness. But 
though sincere friends, the following is the only letter 
from the Duke of Gordon which I find among the 
papers left by Mr. Sinclair. It is very brief, and is purely 
a letter of friendship. I quote it only because it gives 
me an opportunity of making a few observations in rela¬ 
tion both to the Duke and Duchess of Gordon of that 
day. The following is the letter to which I have alluded 
in my previous observations :— 


• Gordon Castle, October 24, 1819. 

My dear Sir, 

I had the pleasure to receive your letter of the 19th last 
night, and take the earliest opportunity in my power to assure 
you that I shall be most happy to see you here in your way to 
town, and it would be very obliging if you could arrange matters 
so as to be here on the 8th of next month at dinner, on which day 
I expect Lord Huntly, and I hope it will be convenient for you 
to meet him. You judge very right, in my opinion, to attend 
the meeting of Parliament, and I think it high time that the 
Radicals should meet with a proper check. 

I remain, my dear Sir, 

Gordon. 



136 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


The Marquis of Huntly, to whom the Duke of Gordon 
here refers, and with whom he was desirous Mr. Sinclair 
should become acquainted, succeeded him in the title 
and the estates when his Grace died, in 1827, and was the 
last of the ducal race of Gordons. With them, as the 
latter had no issue, the title became extinct, or rather 
was merged in the ducality of the head of the house of 
Kichmond, on his death, in 1836. The extinction of the 
dukedom of Gordon was regarded in the more northern 
parts of Scotland as a national calamity. And no wonder, 
when I mention that the house of Gordon had, for up¬ 
wards of eight hundred years, been intimately associated 
with the traditions of the north of Scotland. According, 
indeed, to “ Chambers's Encyclopaedia," some writers have 
asserted that the house of Gordon could be traced as far 
back as prior to the time of Julius Caesar. This, how¬ 
ever, is regarded as a mere fancy or fable by that valu¬ 
able work. So also is the other assertion, that the 
Gordon family came to England in the train of William 
the Conqueror. But it is a well-established historical 
fact that the house of Gordon was a titled house as far 
back as the close of the twelfth century. Some time 
before the year 1437, the head of the house was created 
“ Lord of Gordon." The title “Lord," in this case, 
must have been equivalent to that of the highest 
rank in the nobility at that period, for the “ Lord of 
Gordon’s" eldest son, Alexander, was created “ Earl of 
Huntly," during his father’s lifetime. 

The Duke of Gordon, of whom I am speaking, the last 
but one of the long line of dukes of that name, was re- 
markable foi his mechanical abilities. He had, at Gordon 
Castle, one of the finest workshops m Europe, and found, 


THE DUKE OF GORDON. 


137 


as he sought, his greatest recreation in wood-turning and 
other mechanical occupations. 

There was another equality for which his Grace was no 
less celebrated, and which it were devoutly to be wished 
was more common than it is. I allude to his unfailing 
punctuality in fulfilling his engagements. Nothing short 
of some serious unexpected accident would ever, for ex¬ 
ample, prevent his punctuality even to his dinner engage¬ 
ments. He literally kept, in all the relations of life, in 
reference to his appointments, military time. Dr. Young s 
line, in his “ Night Thoughts,” “ Punctual as lovers to 
the moment sworn,” was strictly true of the Duke of 
Gordon. No matter how distant might be the place 
at which, when at Gordon Castle, he had accepted an 
invitation to dinner, there, just as the clock struck the 
appointed hour, was his Grace sure to be. 

He was a fine, handsome, venerable-looking man when 
I first saw him, which was when I was a mere youth. 
The Duke was approaching his eightieth year when he 
wrote the above letter, and yet the handwriting is as 
clear and distinct as many letters written by persons in 
the meridian of life. His wife was the celebrated Duchess 
of Gordon, who may be said to have been, and indeed is 
still often spoken of, as the Duchess of Gordon. Towards 
the close of the last and the beginning of the present cen¬ 
tury, she was leader in the female fashionable world ; and 
her almost matchless beauty, joined with her irresistible 
fascinations of manner, invested her with an extent of 
influence over the most distinguished statesmen of the 
day, which has been rarely, if ever, surpassed. Pitt was 
her perfect slave. This is a well-known historical fact, 
and many anecdotes illustrative of it have found their 


138 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


way into print. But many of the best and most amusing 
things in connection with the dashing deeds of the bril¬ 
liant Duchess have never, so far as I am aware, found 
their way into the public journals, although in cur¬ 
rent circulation in my native place,—which was only 
nine miles from Gordon Castle. In Scotland, at the 
period to which I allude, the manufacture of smuggled 
whisky—so called because the parties defrauded the 
revenue of the tax on permission to distil whisky—was 
very common in the mountainous and other secluded 
parts of the country; and to check this illicit distil¬ 
lation, a large number of officers called, in England, 
“ excisemen/’ but in Scotland “ gaugers,” were stationed 
in the districts where the practice of thus defrauding the 
revenue was most prevalent. The salary which the 
“gaugers” received varied from £70 to £100, according 
to the nature and extent of the district to which they 
were respectively appointed. Robert Burns, the Scottish 
poet, was, at this period, one of these “ gaugers.” As the 
situation was a genteel one, the office was eagerly sought, 
and members of Parliament were besieged with solicita¬ 
tions from their constituents—at that time consisting only 
of members of the town councils of burghs, or a select 
number of gentlemen in the case of counties—to get ap¬ 
pointments as gaugers for their relatives or friends. On 
one occasion the Duchess of Gordon had promised to ob¬ 
tain an appointment for a relation of some one whom 
she wished to oblige. One morning the Duchess received 
a letter from Scotland, mentioning the fact that a vacancy 
had occurred in a particular district, owing to the death 
of the “ gauger ” who had previously filled the office. 
Knowing the danger of the appointment being given 



THE DUCHESS OF GORDON AND MR. PITT. 


139 


away unless she acted with promptitude, she hastily 
dressed and rushed to Pitt's residence. On the door 
being opened, and she inquiring whether Mr. Pitt was at 
home, she was answered by one of the servants in the 
affirmative. She then desired her name to be sent up to 
the Prime Minister. The servant was astounded at a 
lady wishing to see Mr. Pitt at that early hour in the 
morning, and while in his bed, and, in apologetic 
tones, said that Mr. Pitt would not be down till 
twelve o'clock. 

“ Put," said the Duchess, " I must see him at once, 
show me into his room." 

"It is, your Grace," said the servant, “ impossible ; 
I dare not do that." 

“ But I must see him at once," replied the Duchess. 

"It is impossible, your Grace ; it would be more than 
my situation is worth to show you into his room just 
now.” 

" Then," said the Duchess, " I'll go myself." 

And so saying, she forced her way past the servant, 
flew upstairs, and knocking at the door of Mr. Pitt’s bed¬ 
room, without waiting for an answer, opened it herself. 
She then seized a chair, planted it at the Prime Minis¬ 
ter’s bedside, and coolly seated herself on it. Most gen¬ 
tlemen would have been greatly embarrassed at so sudden 
and so unexpected a visit from a lady under such circum¬ 
stances ; but Pitt, who always prided himself on being, 
as he was in reality, a man who not only had the most 
rigid notions of propriety, but embodied them in practice, 
was not only shocked, but utterly confounded, at receiv¬ 
ing, at so early an hour, and at his very bedside, a visit 
from a lady, and especially a duchess,—and she the most 



140 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


resplendent of all tlie stars then shining in the fashion¬ 
able firmament. His confusion was so great, that he was 
unable, for the moment, to utter a word. But the 
Duchess lost no time in making him acquainted with her 
errand. She told him of the vacant gaugership, and said 
she must get the appointment of a successor for a friend. 
By this time Mr. Pitt had somewhat recovered from his 
surprise and confusion. He said that it would have given 
him great pleasure to comply with her Grace’s wishes, 

but that the thing was impossible, because he had some 

* 

time previously promised the first vacancy to a member 
of the House of Commons—wdiose name he mentioned— 
who had been an efficient and uniform supporter of his 
Government. 

“ I would most willingly give it to your Grace, if I 
could, but I cannot,” said the Prime Minister. 

“But I must have it,” rejoined the Duchess. “Out 
of this chair I do not move until you say I shall 
have it.” 

“ You shall have the next appointment for your friend,” 
said the Prime Minister. 

“ I must have the present ,” retorted the Duchess. 

Feeling his situation to be uncomfortable with a 
duchess sitting at his bedside, and knowing that she 
would carry out her threat of preventing his rising 
until she had accomplished her object, no matter how 
important might be the public business which he had to 
transact,—he saw there was no help for it, but that he 
must capitulate. Pitt accordingly gave the Duchess the 
appointment for her protege; and, thanking him, she 
quitted his bedroom, congratulating herself on the 
triumph she had achieved. 




THE DUCHESS OF GORDON AND A YOUNG NOBLEMAN. 141 

Another anecdote of the brilliant Duchess of Gordon 
is still one of the current traditions for many miles 
around Gordon Castle. That palatial building was, at 
the time of which I am speaking, one of the most cele¬ 
brated ducal residences in Great Britain, for its hospitali¬ 
ties during the lifetime of the Duchess. While the 
shooting season lasted, Gordon Castle was crowded with 
the aristocracy of England. On one occasion, while 
upwards of thirty persons, mostly of the highest rank, 
and from England, were assembled at dinner, a young 
nobleman, the son of an English marquis, and possessing 
more than his proper share of personal vanity, boasted 
before all the company that during his six weeks’ shooting 
in that and the neighbouring county he had acquired so 
complete a knowledge of the Scotch language that he 
felt sure no one could use a Scotch word of which he 
could not at once give the meaning. The Duchess 
accepted the challenge, saying she felt sure she could not 
only name many Scotch Avords, but entire Scotch phrases, 
of the meaning of which he had no idea. The young 
English nobleman still adhered to his opinion, and asked 
her Grace to mention either a Scotch word or phrase 
which she imagined he did not understand. Being the 
daughter of Sir William and Lady Maxwell, Scotch 
parents, and brought up in Scotland, she had a thorough 
knowledge of the Scotch language. Accordingly she 
asked the young nobleman to give, if he could, the 
meaning of the following words : “ Come pree my mou’, 
my canty callant.” He seemed lost for a few moments 
in profound thought, and at last admitted that he did 
not understand the meaning of her Grace’s sentence. 
Neither did any of the English guests. The Duchess Avas 


142 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

then asked by one of the noblemen present for a trans¬ 
lation of the phrase into plain English. She at once 
gave it, and the shouts of laughter on the part of the 
English portion of the company, and the confusion and 
mortification of the young nobleman, may easily be 
guessed when she gave the meaning thus :—“ Come, kiss 
me, my handsome young man.” Had he understood the 
words, he would have at once gone up to the Duchess 
and embraced her in the presence of all the com¬ 
pany ; for she had invited him to do so in the Scotch 
language. 

The sprightly and witty Duchess of Gordon had five 
daughters, three of whom were married severally to the 
Dukes of Richmond, Manchester, and Bedford. She 
tried hard to get Mr. Pitt for a son-in-law by his marry¬ 
ing one of her daughters, but with all the unparalleled 
fascination she possessed, and the great influence she 
exercised over him, her efforts were unsuccessful. The 
reason, however, which he assigned for not marrying, 
was so patriotic, that even she must have admired it. 
“I have no intention of ever marrying at all. I am 
married to my country; but were I to marry any lady, 
I would marry one of your Grace’s daughters.” One 
of them married Sir Robert Sinclair, but though the 
name was the same, he was no relation, or, if at all, a 
very remote one, of the subject of these Memoirs. The 
clannishness, however, of the Sinclairs may have had 
something to do in connection with the friendship which 
the Gordon and Sinclair families cherished for each 
other. 

Mr. Sinclair was on terms of the closest intimacy with 
another nobleman, whose principal seat was about thirty 



THE EARL AND COUNTESS OF FIFE. 


143 


miles from Gordon Castle. The nobleman to whom I 
allude is Lord Fife, uncle of the present earl of that name. 
Lord Fife had no fewer than five family seats, more 
or less extensive, all within a distance of fifty or sixty 
miles of each other. The chief seat of the Fife family is 
Duff House, about a mile from Banff. Another is Bal- 
venie Castle, also in Banffshire. Two other of Lord 
Fife’s residences are Mar Lodge and Skene House, but 
they are essentially sporting lodges ; while the remain¬ 
ing one is Innes House, in Morayshire, within five miles 
of Elgin. 

The beautiful Countess of Fife, to whom I have alluded 
in a previous part of this work as having died of hydro¬ 
phobia, in the year 1805, in consequence of being kissed 
on the cheek by a favourite Spanish lap-dog, was the wife 
of this Earl of Fife, who was not only the intimate friend, 
but a frequent correspondent, of Mr. Sinclair. I am in 
possession of several of his letters, all of which are racily 
written, but they contain such frequent and often pun¬ 
gent references to individuals in aristocratic and other 
prominent circles, that it would not be expedient, re¬ 
membering that most of the parties have descendants, to 
transfer them to my pages. I will, therefore, only give 
one of these letters. It was written in the year 1826, 
and is dated from Duff House. It is as follows :— 

My dear Sinclair, 

Your kind note duly reached me, but I much fear that I can¬ 
not on this occasion avail myself of it, although you offer tempt¬ 
ing goods. But I hope what is deferre is not 'perdu, as we shall 
live to see your good intentions fulfilled. I had a long walk with 
Grant, our minister, to-day. I told him of your friend at Inver¬ 
ness. He thought it must be a Mr. Clarke, with whom he had 
heard you were thick. 


144 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I hope you have made good use of your time at the classes. 
You will be, after all this, too blue. Mrs. Sinclair gives bad 
accounts of Miss Manners. I never heard of a more unfortunate 
situation. Perhaps there are few instances of such a visitation. 
As a good saint, you are bound to protect any one of the name 
of Michael,—a Michael’s sons and a Michael’s daughters ; and 
I hope you will allow me by-and-by the opportunity of judging 
how much merit the young lady has. With best wishes to Mrs. 
Sinclair and all the gabs (children), without exception, believe 
me, my dear Sinclair, 

Most truly yours, 

Fife. 

The Mr. Clarke to whom Lord Fife here alludes as the 
friend of Mr. Sinclair was the Rev. Mr. Clarke, an 
evangelical minister of the Church of Scotland, in Inver¬ 
ness, for whom Mr. Sinclair was endeavouring at the time 
to obtain some ecclesiastical preferment. The “ Mr. 
Grant, our minister,” alluded to was not, as some might 
suppose, the minister of the Gospel whose church Lord 
Fife attended. He was a Cabinet Minister, afterwards 
Lord Glenelg, and a peer of the realm. He was a man 
of high intellectual culture, and though he did not speak 
often, either as Member of the House of Commons, or as 
Member of the House of Lords, his speeches were re¬ 
garded by those who were privileged to listen to them in 
either branch of the Legislature as models of a high order 
of eloquence. But very few parties are, I believe, ac¬ 
quainted with a curious fact connected with Lord 
Glenelg s latter history. All of a sudden he retired from 
public life, without assigning any reason for the step ; 
and for a period of fully ten years no one outside the 
walls of his own house saw the noble Lord; nor, in¬ 
deed, did any but his domestics see him inside his resi¬ 
dence. One who had good means of knowing told me, 


LORD GLENELG. 


U 


liow lie spent his time ; for, if he never went out, nor saw 
anyone at home, it might have been inferred that be¬ 
cause he was a man of cultivated literary taste, he spent 
his days in reading or writing. Such was not the fact. 
Lord Glenelg’s time was chiefly spent in sitting in a fa¬ 
vourite chair, without book or pen in his hand, and gazing 
on the opposite side of his room for hours together. He 
seemed as if lost in contemplation, and utterly unconscious 
of all around him. But the most extraordinary thing in 
connection with this fact is, that after what may be called 
this semi-trance had lasted upwards of ten years, it 
entirely left him, and he reappeared in society, and 
seemed to enjoy it as much as he had ever done at any 
previous period of his life. It looked like a kind of 
resurrection from the dead; and for a considerable time 
many refused to believe the fact when informed of it. 
But when the evidence of sight compelled belief, the case 
of Lord Glenelg was spoken of as a modified case of 
Bip Van Winkleism. It happened that soon after he 
reappeared in society, I spent several hours with him at 
the house of a mutual friend; and never in the whole 
course of my life did I meet with a more agreeable com¬ 
panion, or one who was evidently blessed with a more 
cheerful frame of mind. And this, too, though at the 
time to which I allude, he must have exceeded the term 
of threescore years and ten allotted to us as the period 
of our sojourn in this lower sphere. Physically, also, he 
was, to all appearance, as full of life as he was when I 
first met him, twenty-five years before this time. We 
walked together from the house of the friend where we 
had dined, at the east end of Kemp Town, Brighton, to 
the Bedford Hotel, where he was staying at the time,—a 


14G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

distance of considerably more than two miles, and 
though I do not consider myself a bad pedestrian, I am 
willing to give, on that occasion, the palm of light and 
rapid walking to Lord Glenelg. He walked, in a word, 
with as quick and elastic a step as if he had been a mere 
youth, just emerging from his teens. 

I have known many instances of men taking extra¬ 
ordinary fancies, or being seized with a depression of 
spirits, which have induced them to seclude themselves 
entirely from society, but I never knew an instance 
which, after a seclusion so entire, and so prolonged, and 
of such a nature as that of Lord Glenelg, was followed 
by a recovery so complete as was his restoration to his 
former feelings and habits. 

Another of the earliest and most aristocratic friends of 
Mr. Sinclair to whom it is right I should refer in this 
chapter was the Viscount Dudley of the first quarter of the 
century. Lord Dudley, I ought to mention, was not only 
one of the warmest friends that ever Mr. Sinclair had, 
either in aristocratic or in any other circles, but was 
related to him by marriage. The Viscountess of Dudley 
was the grand-aunt of Mr. Sinclair. Lord Dudley and 
Mr. Sinclair were constantly in each others society, and 
the latter used to say that he never spent happier 
hours than those which he spent at Lord Dudley's 
principal country seat, Himley Llall, Staffordshire, and 
in his town residence, Dudley House, Park Lane. Lord 
Dudley was a fine specimen of the old English nobility,— 
open, genial, generous, and hospitable. He was a favourite 
with everybody ; but he and his only son, William, never 
could agree,—the latter feeling or fancying that his father 
had treated him very unkindly, and that he had most 



VISCOUNT DUDLEY AND HIS SON. 


117 


grievously neglected to give him the education which 
became the son of a peer occupying a high position in 
aristocratic society, and the successor to the Dudley titles 
and estates. Mr. Sinclair made every possible effort, by 
letters and otherwise, to bring about a better state of 
things between the father and the son, but without effect. 
Some of the letters of the latter, written to Mr. Sinclair on 
the subject, are at present in my possession, but as they 
contain many things which exclusively relate to family 
matters of some delicacy, I will make no further reference 
to them than this,—that while Lord Dudley’s son com¬ 
plains with much warmth of feeling that his education 
had been most unwarrantably neglected by his father, 
and that he was treated by him before friends, and even 
the servants, with great indignity, his letters are written 
with remarkable ability. Regarded indeed as specimens of 
composition, I have scarcely ever seen anything to sur¬ 
pass them. But of his literary talents, Mr. Ward, after 
he succeeded his father as Lord Dudley, gave ample 
proof in his contributions to the “ Quarterly Review.” 
For several years, indeed, he was one of the most piquant 
and brilliant writers in that periodical. 

On succeeding his father in the Dudley title and 
estates, the Hon. William Ward, soon after raised to 
the dignity of an Earldom, broke off all intimacy, in 
nearly every instance, with the friends of his father. 
Amongst others who found themselves in this position 
was Mr. Sinclair. The fact made a profound and painful 
impression on Mr. Sinclair’s mind,—which was natural, 
especially as the new Lord Dudley was well aware of the 
earnest and repeated efforts which he had made to bring 
about a better state of relations between him and his 




143 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

father. On passing Dudley House one day, as he was 
walking along Park Lane, thoughts and feelings connected 
with the altered state of things passed through Mi. 
Sinclair’s mind, and to these, on his return home, he 
gave utterance m the following lines, which are poetically 
beautiful, as well as full of pathos :— 

THE PAST AND THE PRESENT. 

Past, past, are those moments to memory so clear, 

When the glad voice of welcome was there, 

When the portals flew open as Marcus drew near, 

And with light heart he traversed the stair. 

Deep, deep is the sigh fond affection must heave, 

And I feel how the scalding tears burn, 

When I think of the hour at which last we took leave, 

How unconscious no such would return. 

Closed, closed are those eyes which, though pale, sunk, and old, 

When we met, fondly sparkled with glee, 

The friend’s hand that pressed mine with such warmth, is now cold 
As the heart of his son towards me. 

Peace, peace to that son for the sake of his sire, 

May each blessing still rest on his head ; 

To complain of the living becomes not my lyre,— 

Be it mine still to mourn for the dead. 

Mr. Sinclair, I feel assured, never dreamt of these 
beautiful lines ever seeing the light of day. They were 
written solely for the purpose of affording some relief to 
the pent-up grief which he felt at the altered circum¬ 
stances which had occurred in the Dudley family. But 
with that change, it will be seen from the closing verse, 
there was not associated any unkind feeling towards him 
who was the cause of the alteration. Indeed, that would 
have been a moral impossibility in the case of such a 
man as Mr. Sinclair. He was a perfect stranger all 
through life to feelings of resentment. He was one of 

O o 

the most forgiving men I ever met with in a somewhat 


THE EARL AND COUNTESS OF DUDLEY AND WARD. 119 


prolonged existence, and rather extensive intercourse with 
mankind. 

I oimht to add that Sir George Sinclair was, until the 

O O 7 

time of his death, on terms of the warmest friendship 
with the present Earl of Dudley and his beautiful 
Countess, both of whose letters, couched in the kindest 
language, he had carefully preserved. 


CHAPTER VII. 


Mr. Sinclair’s Christian Character—His Religious Friends and Correspondents 
—Letters from Viscount and Viscountess Mandeville, afterwards Duke 
and Duchess of Manchester—Letters from Lord Roden. 

I have had occasion incidentally to refer in several 
of my previous chapters to the eminently religious tone 
of Mr. Sinclair’s mind, and to the beautiful consistency of 
his conduct with his Christian principles. But I should be 
doing injustice to his memory and presenting a defective 
view of his character, were I not to devote a chapter to 
the exclusive object of endeavouring to bring out clearly 
those elements in his moral and spiritual constitution, 
which contributed so largely to the high estimation in 
which he was universally held. And this, I feel, I shall 
be best able to do by giving some of the many letters 
written to him on religious subjects, mostly in answer to 
letters of his; for it is in the unreserved correspondence 
between those whose views are similar, and whose sym¬ 
pathies are the same, that we can obtain the most 
minute and most correct knowledge of men’s real cha¬ 
racter. 

Among the number of Mr. Sinclair’s religious friends in 
early life, I ought to mention the name of the late Duke 
of Manchester, then Viscount Mandeville. They were 


YISCT. MANDEVILLE, AFTERWARDS DUKE OF MANCHESTER. 151 

men, between whom there not only existed a strong friend¬ 
ship on personal grounds, but they were knit together 
by the far more tender ties which unite Christians 
with each other. They took great pleasure in reading 
the Old Testament Scriptures together. They often met 
for private prayer, and other devotional exercises. They 
were frequent, if not habitual hearers of the Rev. Mr. 
Howells, of Long Acre Episcopal Chapel, and from time 
to time went to listen to the ministrations of the late 
Rev. James ITarington Evans, of John Street Chapel, 
Bedford Row. Probably the world lias rarely wit¬ 
nessed two such original and experimental ministers of 
the Gospel, as these two men,—personally, I ought to 
add, equally intimate and warmly attached. I have 
again and again met with Mr. Sinclair, when Sir George 
Sinclair, at John Street Chapel. And the views which 
he entertained of Mr. Evans as a preacher of the Gospel, 
may be inferred from the fact, that when, at one period, 
his friend, the late Mr. Spooner, M.P. for North War¬ 
wickshire, was believed to be dying, Sir George,—for he 
had by this time succeeded his father in the baronetcy 
and the Ulbster family estates,—went down to North 
Warwickshire to see his friend, and read to him portions 
of Mr. Evans’s published sermons, as the most suitable 
matter for a dying hour. So great was Mr. Sinclair’s 
admiration of the pulpit ministrations of both Mr. Howells 
and Mr. Evans, that he used to take, for his own edifica¬ 
tion, copious short-hand notes of their sermons,—a fact, 
which would of itself suffice to show what a spiritually- 
minded man he was at this period of his life, when it 
might have been feared his high social position and his 
eminent, I had almost said, transcendent intellectual ac- 




152 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


quirements, would be fatally antagonistic to the religion 
of the heart, the only religion which is acceptable to God. 
Mr. Sinclair, it is right to say, did not agree with Lord 
Mandeville in some of his religious views, such as that 
the Book of Ezekiel was not inspired,—a notion to which 
he clung through life, and which, when Duke of Man¬ 
chester, he sought to vindicate in his large octavo work 
on the Book of Daniel, published some years before his 
death. But Mr. Sinclair was a man of most liberal mind. 
Mere theological differences never interfered with his 

O 

private friendships,—though it is but justice to his 
memory to say, that never did any one more uncom¬ 
promisingly adhere to, or more emphatically assert, his 
own religious opinions. The comprehensiveness of his 
charity embraced men of all creeds, so far as the courte¬ 
sies and friendships of life were concerned. And, there¬ 
fore, the peculiar notion of the Duke of Manchester, then 
Earl Mandeville, respecting his non-recognition of the 
Book of Ezekiel as a part of the canonical Scripture, did 
not in the slightest degree impair the friendship with 
which Sir George regarded him. They were constantly 
with each other, and one of their greatest pleasures was to 
read the Old Testament in Hebrew together,—both hav¬ 
ing a sufficient knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures, to 
enable them to read the Old Testament with ease and 
profit. And yet, while Mr. Sinclair was thus devoting 
much of his spare time to biblical studies, he was one of 
the choicest favourites in the most aristocratic and 
intellectual circles in England. Were I to write pages 
in terms of the warmest eulogy which I could employ, I 
could pay no higher tribute to the noble and Christian 
character of the subject of these Memoirs, than I do in 




LETTER FROM LORD MANDEVILLE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 15;; 

recording these simple facts in connection with this 
period in his most interesting history. 

The following letter from Lord Mandeville to Mr. 
Sinclair, will be better understood, when I mention, 
that Mr. Sinclair, afterwards Sir George Sinclair, was 
repeatedly and severely tried by bereavements and afflic¬ 
tions in various forms in his family. And these were felt 
all the more acutely, because of his ill-health,—of which 
he had so often to complain. At times, the result was a 
great depression of spirits. Often on such occasions he 
felt his lot was a hard one, and not unfrequently a feel¬ 
ing of doubt seemed to take possession of his mind as to 
whether the trials through which he was called to pass 
were reconcileable with the goodness of God. The fol¬ 
lowing letter, though undated, was, I know, written by 
Lord Mandeville to Mr. Sinclair on the sudden death of 
Mr. Sinclair’s eldest son in 1845 :— 

My dear Sinclair, 

Job sacrificed continually for his sons, yet the Lord was 
pleased to remove them suddenly ; and the devil tempted him, 
through his wife, with much the same temptation as apparently 
is now assaulting you. 

Dost thou still retain thine integrity ? You seem to think 
your many prayers have not been answered, and then you doubt 
the benefit of prayer altogether. Let us consider God’s dealings 
with respect to yourself first, and then with regard to him you 
have lost. Has it not been necessary to show to you that 
your will was not in submission to God’s will? Your prayers 
have not that limitation, “ Not my will, but thine, be done.” If 
they had, you cannot say they were not heard because you did 
not receive an answer in the way you desired. It has been to 
you a heavy blow, but a heavy blow was necessary to reach the 
deeply-rooted rebellion that might have been in your heart. You 
have been long under the influence of religion ; the surface may 
have healed, when there might still have been a sore beneath. 



154 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Forgive me if I give you pain in probing. I may, perhaps, have 
altogether mistaken the whole circumstances, and may, perhaps, 
like Job’s friends, been causing overmuch sorrow, when I ought 
to have been striving to comfort in some other way. May God 
be to you the Good Physician. 

Your affectionate 

Mandeville. 

Instead of giving any more of Lord Mandeville’s 
letters to Mr. Sinclair under his own hand, I am sure 
that no one will regret that I give some of Lady Man- 
deville’s instead ; because, while essentially the same with 
regard to the soundness of their theology as those of her 
husband, they are characterised by a fervour of feeling, 
and a refinement of diction, which are very rarely to be 
met with in the writings of those of our own sex. But 
before making public the following letters of Lady Man¬ 
deville, it will, no doubt, be acceptable to make a few 
remarks respecting the writer. Viscountess Mandeville 
was the daughter of the late Lady Olivia Sparrow. Lady 
Mandeville was at this time young,—being considerably 
under thirty years of age. She possessed great personal 
attractions, and with the prospect of acquiring, before 
long, the title of Duchess of Manchester, in conjunction 
with her being at the time the Viscountess of Mandeville, 
she occupied a social position of the highest kind. She 
was besides eminently accomplished. She was intimately 
acquainted with several languages which had ceased to 
be spoken, and which hardly any ladies of rank in 
London knew anything about. Among those dead 
languages, of which she might be said to be mistress, 
were Greek and Hebrew. At all events, her profici¬ 
ency in the latter two languages was sufficiently great 



LETTER FROM LADY MANDEYILLE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 


155 


to enable her to instruct her children in them. Her son, 
the present Duke of Manchester, acquired a consider¬ 
able acquaintance with Hebrew under the tuition of his 
mother when Lady Mandeville. It is an interesting fact, 
that up to this time that lady and Mr. Sinclair had not 
personally met. Her regard for him arose from the 
high esteem in which he was held by her husband, and 
which was confirmed and strengthened by Mr. Sinclair’s 
letters to Lord Mandeville. To this circumstance Lady 
Mandeville alludes in the beginning of the following 
letter, where she speaks of their acquaintance as “ having 
the air of a German romance.” The letter is not dated, 
beyond the words, “ Tandragee Castle, 12th,” but it must 
have been written, judging from incidental expressions, 
either in 1823 or 1824. Tandragee Castle, which be¬ 
longs to the Manchester family, is in Ireland. 

My dear Mr. Sinclair, 

I think we have arrived at an acquaintance which bears as 
much the air of German romance as you can desire. Knowing 
more and more of each other in the Spirit, yet as to aught less 
incorporeal, as unknown, as if ages had separated the periods 
of our respective existences on earth. I only regret this on one 
account. Your vivid imagination has, I see, painted me in 
colours which will grievously fade on nearer inspection. I am 
not the intellectual, accomplished being you fancy,—gifted by 
nature with tolerable abilities, but with an inordinate share of 
imagination, and—all the et ceteras thereunto belonging. I 
never had patience to arrive even near perfection in any one 
pursuit; and the disappointments which ever attend the un¬ 
happy votary of ideal pleasures contributed to destroy the little 
energy I ever possessed, and to leave me—what I am, hut not, 
alas ! what you think me to be. I can live in hope of what I 
shall be hereafter, when being “ like Him ” whom we both serve, 
romance, in its most rapturous flight, shall find itself infinitely 


1,“>G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, EART. 

below the glorious truth. Till then, dear brother in Christ, let 
us seek to obey the Apostle’s injunction, “not to think too 
highly,” whether of ourselves or others. I have many things to 
thank you for, and not among the least-esteemed, your letters, 
which give me great pleasure ; and now that I am about to enter 
on a long solitude, they will be doubly acceptable, should you 
have time and inclination occasionally to bestow a few thoughts 
on “the little unknown.” 

It was very kind in you to send me your poem. The pleasure 
with which I read it arose, not only from the facility and grace 
of the description, but from its carrying me back so completely 
to the people and the habits which had been so ensnaring to me 
some ten years since. Nobody ever was more led away by the 
tastes and refinements of polite life, and no one ever can be 
more completely cut off from them than I am now in the 
absence of the Rodens. There is not one who has ever walked 
the same circle, or bears one trace of the polish which adds such 
a charm to society, that, without the lustre, it becomes only 
better than continual solitude. 

I do most ardently long for that blessed period when every 
brother and sister shall be beautiful without and “all glorious 
withinwhen the clear and lovely crystal shall be solid gold, 
and the solid gold transparent and beautiful glass. 

I do not know from what you drew the inference respecting 
the short-hand. I did once know a little of Gurney, but, as in 
everything else, very imperfectly. I fear yours is not the same 
system, if I may judge by the contraction you made of the word 
happiness. Would we could make a portable concern of that 
valuable article ! We might, did we walk with God in that close 
communion and intimate fellowship which He desires of us. 
What short-hand is yours ? I should like to learn it very much; 
I could then have much increased pleasure in our correspon¬ 
dence, without any additional fatigue to you. You may remem¬ 
ber the word you wrote for “ happiness ” in a recent letter to 
Mandeville ; it is to that to which I allude. 

I am much obliged for, and much pleased with, the account of 
the speeches at the Trinitarian Bible Society meeting, and with 
the nice extracts from dear Mr. Howells, which it was so kind in 
you to think of sending. I hope to return them to-morrow or 


LETTER FROM LADY MANDEYILLE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 157 

next day at furthest, and shall be always thankful for your allow¬ 
ing me the benefit of perusing any such. 

Mandeville desires his kind and Christian love to you. He 
intends going to Dublin on Monday, and to cross, I suppose, on 
Thursday. That the Lord may bless you with the abundance 
of grace and peace, is the sincere prayer of your affectionate 
sister in Christ, 

M. Mandeville. 


I am sure this letter will be read with great interest 

O 

by all those who share the evangelical views, on religious 
subjects, which were so fondly cherished by Lady Man¬ 
deville and Mr. Sinclair. I cannot resist the temptation 
to transfer to these pages another letter to Mr. Sinclair 
from the Viscountess, selected from a large number which 
she addressed to him. The following letter, like the 
preceding, is without any definite date. At the head we 
simply find— 

Tandragee Castle, Jan. 20. Midnight. 

I think I must address you as my dear brother; to which, 
indeed you have many claims. First and best, are we not 
brethren in Him who is the Sustainer, the Saviour, the Lord 
and the Comforter of all such ? Then, he who is dearest to me 
on earth appears to hold almost an equal place in your affection ; 
and I cannot help looking on you as one whose heart the Lord 
has disposed in kindness to comfort me during a season of be¬ 
reavement—for I am indeed alone, having not one at hand 
with whom I can have any of that unreserved communication 
which alone produces happiness. And again, if I might ven¬ 
ture to judge by your letters, I think we must have no small 
similarity of taste and feeling. But I am so apt to fancy the 
existence of what I wish, and then a nearer approach discovers 
the fine expanse of refreshing waters to be but arid desert; 
and it may be that did you know me, those feelings of—I had 
almost said affection, which you now bestow on an imaginary 
object, would be withdrawn, despite yourself. However, com- 


158 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


fort is too needful to me to be lavished in the doubts and fears 
of a future, which may never arrive to apply the test. And I 
must thank you with no small gratitude for your kindness. I 
must own that it is with real pleasure 1 now find your frank 
among my letters in the morning, and if I have none to acknow¬ 
ledge these communications—and, if possible, none more wel¬ 
come than the last,—you must not attribute my tardy thanks to 
indifference. My time has been occupied partly with suffering 
both of mind and body, and partly with business, which a more 
systematic person would, I fear, have far sooner dispatched. 

My dear husband left me on Wednesday last, and was to sail, 
or rather evaporate, on Wednesday afternoon, to Holyhead, 
thence to Liverpool and Brampton (my brother’s home), then to 
London, and there I suppose you will see him next week. If I 
could but sometimes make a third (though that is the most invidi¬ 
ous number in the world), and “ wishing is the hectic of a fever,” 
says Young. However, it is a fever the deliriums of which are 
sometimes very sweet. I hope you read the speeches at the 
last public meeting. I liked them, notwithstanding your being 
a Whig, and I a Reformer. Are you not ? Call yourself what 
you will, you ably and generously espoused the cause of the poor 
Protestants, in the very interesting and, to me, most gratifying- 
conversation you recorded. If it could but open eyes which 
appear to be now completely obscured in the grey twilight of 
evening—I cannot say morning—that would impart a dawn of 
hope which I hardly dare to cherish. I do believe we are right in 
rallying round one standard, though it be for the last time. If 
defeat follows, it is more worthy to die in arms in the cause of 
truth, than to be trampled under foot in the sleepiness of in¬ 
action. Only think of your giving poor dear Mandeville’s letter 
to the Queen to read. I fear she could not decipher it. How 
can you wish me to know her ? What good could I do, should I 
have the pain of seeing the suffering of another without the 
power of alleviating it ? The Pavilion was once the scene of 
great attraction ; how changed now! I should not like to enter 
it again. What, you think I should not consider your letter 
sufficiently decided. I cannot but admire the union of boldness 
and respect. I am sure you at least must receive a blessing in 
it. How encouraging the letter from Paris. The Lord has "the 


LETTER FROM LADY MANDEVILLE TO MR. SINCLAIR. 159 

seven thousand in Baal. He has too the angelic accompani¬ 
ment round His beloved ones ; though the blind eyes discern 
neither the one nor the other. What comfort in the midst of 
our weakness to see that the Lord’s favoured prophets were 
men of like passions ; yet the Lord bore with their weaknesses, 
their doubts, their distrusting fears. He who enlightened them 
for our sakes, can enlighten us also, and cause us to rejoice 
in His love, and give us to know the sweetness, the ineffable 
sweetness, of being one with Him. Oh, we say the word, 
but how very faint our perception of the wonderful reality. 
Hid we know more of it, how all-absorbing it would be,—how 
full our joy, how earnest our longing to see Him as he is. 

I return, also, the delightful note from dear Howells. He cer¬ 
tainly has noble thoughts, and knows how to express them 
energetically. I wish very much I knew your short-hand. Have 
you any set of rules ? or can I get them anyhow ? I feel in no 
degree to merit the trouble you take in writing and transcribing 
for me, and yet am too selfish to wish to forego the pleasure of 
reading. What is the matter with your arm, of which you com¬ 
plain in your last ? I much regret being the occasion of pain to 
you any way ; certainly I would not stand in that connection 
with anyone on earth, could I help it. I fear I kept Howells’ 
note much too long. I will not be so neglectful again, and rely 
upon it that nothing you write or say in confidence will go 
further, be it to whom it may, except my husband, were he at 
home, and we are one , you know. Indeed, that is my claim, and 
has been the cause of your kindness to me, of course. May you 
and he have much delightful communion in thought and word, 
in love and prayer. It is a great comfort to me to know that 
in my absence he has one dear friend who will watch over him 
and comfort him, and will make him take care of himself. I 
hope he will live near you. But I really fear that I have 
much lost sight of the imaginative nature of our acquaintance, 
but you must blame yourself for this, and I must shelter myself 
under a truth which Lord Byron knew better how to express 
than practise, I fear, yet true it is : “The heart must leap kindly 
back to kindness.” So I leave you to frame my excuse from 
the name you have been pleased to give me, and with sincere 
prayer for your peace and joy in believing, as regards your own 


1G0 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


experience, and that you may be appointed to comfort one, and 
enlighten the other, of our Sovereigns,. 

Believe me, dear brother in the Lord, 

Affectionately yours, 

M. Mandeville. 

It would be difficult to say whether this letter, like the 
one which preceded it, is most to be admired for the 
vein of spirituality by which it is pervaded throughout, 
or for the high order of intellect and the beauty of 
diction by which it is characterised. 

Among those with whom Air. Sinclair, at this period of 
his life, associated much and corresponded largely, was 
the Earl of Boden. Their friendship was first formed and 
w r as sustained to the last by the affinity of their religious 
views. Nothing could exceed the warmth of his lord¬ 
ship’s affection for Mr. Sinclair, or the admiration with 
which he regarded his character, whether as a Christian, 
or as the possessor of the highest and most varied in¬ 
tellectual attainments. I have lying before me a number 
of letters from the Earl of Boden to Mr. Sinclair, begin- 
ning as far back as 1824, and continued with greater or 
less intervals down to the death of the latter. The first 
letter written by Lord Boden to and preserved by Mr. 
Sinclair is dated “ Tullymore, August 24, 1824,” and 
curiously enough, the second was dated from the same 
place, on the same day of the same month, two years 
afterwards. They both abound in that evangelical piety 
for which Lord Boden was at that time eminent— 
more than forty years ago—and for which, now that 
he is in his eighty-second year, he is equally so. The 
following is the first of the two letters to which I have 
alluded :— 



LETTER FROM LORD RODEN TO MR. SINCLAIR. 


1G1 


Tullymore Park, August 24th, 1824. 

My dear Sinclair, 

I was very glad to receive your letter, together with its en¬ 
closure. It one sinner’s repentance is the joy of the angels in 
heaven, how ought the news of one brother whom we were ac¬ 
quainted with in the flesh being brought to a knowledge of 

o o o 

Jesus to rejoice us ,—“ Yea, I do rejoice, and I will rejoice.” I 
need not tell you the blessing and comfort of Christians ; I need 
not tell you the peace it bestows under all circumstances, and 
the serenity which it produces, even in the most adverse circum¬ 
stances. We are taught there is a " needs be ” for every trial. 
We are brought to see that everything must work together for 
good for the Lord’s chosen, and therefore it is that we can, not 
mei'ely understand, but adopt, the language of Paul, and rejoice 
in the midst of tribulation. As you know, I have lived a great 
part of my life in all that the world calls great and good. I have 
sat basking in the sunshine of my Sovereign’s favour ; I have 
experienced the applause and fawning flattery of the world ; I 
had everything in abundance of what this world calls good, but 
I do see that they are all trumpery. I desire to count them all 
as dung and dross, when compared with the truths of Christ’s 
Gospel,—when brought into the same scales with that heaven 
which He has in store for His people. I am glad to hear you 
are living in the retirement of Scotland, as I trust it is there the 
Lord means to teach } r ou yourself before perhaps he will call 
you into active life again. And oh, my dear Sinclair, if you learn 
yourself, you will learn the best lesson you ever learnt, and the 
most astonishing one, too ; for, if you learn right, you will see 
yourself nothing but a lump of sin and corruption,—hateful in 
the sight of Holiness because of your corrupt nature,—and this 
sight will lead you more and more to think of a heavenly, and 
you will daily grow in estimation of that glorious, that all-suffi¬ 
cient, that free-bought blood reward—that one atonement that 
w 7 as made for you in the blood of Jesus, and that glorious work 
that was wrought out for you in that righteousness with which 
He covers His people. Our situation here is very retired. \\ e 
are from the buzz of the world, but that don’t lessen the con¬ 
flict. There is a world in our hearts which it is well for us to 
be always at war with; but it is a blessed thought that this 


1G2 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


warfare is one,—not as in other cases, doubtful,—for we are 
more than conquerors through Him who has loved us. 

We leave this for Dundalk, another place I have twenty-live 
miles from hence, next month, where Lady Roden is going to be 
confined. I gave her your message. She remembers you very well, 
and desires her kind regards to you, and she is not a little re¬ 
joiced to think that the Lord has been pleased to open your eyes, 
and to show you himself as all in all. I shall be truly happy, when¬ 
ever it is your convenience, to hear from you, though you must 
not expect many quick replies from me, as I am deeply engaged 
in business, which occupies a great part of my time. I would 
conclude by begging of you to remember me in your prayers. 
We are in much difficulty in this county from great opposition 
to contend with, and we have all around us staring us in the 
lace, every step we take, the horrid engine of iniquity at work— 
“ Popery, in all its worst shapes.” That the grace of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, and the peace of God, and the communion of the 
Lloly Spirit, may belong to you and yours, is the sincere wish of 

Your sincere Friend in the best bonds, 

Roden. 


It will be seen from the concluding portion of this 
letter—so remarkable for the clearness of its views of the 
great plan of salvation—that Lord Roden looked with 
the same eyes, more than forty years ago, on the hideous 
visage of Popery, as he does at the present time. I rather 
think, indeed, that he regards it to-day, as a thing to be 
more abhorred and dreaded than he did at the date 
of this letter. I may say, indeed, that I know from 
the private communications of friend's, that the long 


period which has intervened since this letter proceeded 
from his lordship’s pen, has only served to impart 
greater depth to the dark colouring of the picture, which 
ball a century ago he was in the habit of presenting 
to the public. 

The second of the two letters which Lord Roden ad- 



LETTER FROM LORD RODEN TO MR. SINCLAIR, 


1G3 


dressed, at the dates I have mentioned, to Mr. Sinclair, is 
chiefly characterised by the utterances of the writers 
deep Christian experience. It is, indeed, on that account 
that 1 transfer it to these pages, because a correspondence 
of this very spiritual nature shows how far Mr. Sinclair 
was at this time advanced in the Divine life, although so 
young in years, and mingling in the very choicest aristo¬ 
cratic and intellectual society. I have not been able to 
ascertain the exact date of the letter. 


My dear Sinclair, 

Many thanks for your kind inquiry. It would afford me at 
all times very great pleasure to meet you again ; but I fear the 
report you hear is not correct, and that we shall not be able to 
go to Edinburgh. Our next destination, I believe, will be Lon¬ 
don, if we leave home. I feel so interested in this Roman Catholic 
question, which is likely to come on early next session, that I 
should be very sorry not to be at my post in the House of Lords 
when it is brought forward ; and there is no place in which I am 
better fed than in London. There are one or two dear servants of 
the Master who give us the sweet cream of Gospel truth, which I 
find so needful to uphold and strengthen my soul. I see no peace 
or comfort but, as it were, at the top of the ladder; and though we 
are very often at the bottom, it is a precious earnest of that to 
which we shall ultimately attain, to be struggling to get up. 
It is, too, a blessed thing to be sustained and cheered by the 
promises of an unchangeable Jehovah, who, while we are often 
driven about like a weathercock, is always the same. “ Christ 
is all,” has for some years been my motto and comfort; and I 
can say, the older I grow the more I see of His suitableness for 
me, an unworthy, but saved, sinner. Our Lord is displaying his 
love to me in temporals and spirituals ; and while we are sur¬ 
rounded with a cloud of Popish idolatry, and the Monster of In¬ 
fidelity is stalking amongst us in the garb of Christianity, it is 
my comfort to know that the Lord has in Ilis own Church 
many of His own people among all denominations, who are lean¬ 
ing on his arm, and who are privileged in ascribing to Him 
and to the Father and the Holy Ghost all power and glory. 


1C4 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

That you and I may be found among this blessed number, to 
His honour, may He, in His infinite mercy, grant. 

Believe me, very sincerely, 

Yours in the best bonds, 

Roden. 

How highly Mr. Sinclair prized this letter, and how 
much it was in harmony with his own views on the 
most important of all questions, may be inferred from 
the fact, that he wrote on the envelope, “ A most kind 
letter from Lord Roden.” 

The next letter from Lord Roden to the subject of this 
Memoir, which I shall give, was written with the view 
of administering all possible comfort to him under a 
rapid succession of heavy bereavements. In the brief 
space of three weeks, Sir George Sinclair,—for he had by 
this time succeeded to the title and estates of Ulbster, 
consequent on the death of his father, Sir John, —lost 
suddenly his eldest son in New Zealand, his mother, and 
one of his sisters. He was staying at Brighton at the 
time, to which he had gone for the benefit of his health, 
which had been very much impaired for some months 
previously. As might be expected, he was quite stunned 
by three such heavy blows, all within three weeks. He 
returned, as soon as he was able to undertake the seven 
hundred miles journey, to Thurso Castle, and never, as 
he mentioned to me on several occasions, slept a single 
night from home for the long period of seven years. 
These few observations will enable the reader more fully 
to understand the following letter from Lord Roden. 

Tullymore Park, 23rd Sept. 1847. 

My very dear Friend and old Schoolfellow, 

I have just received your sad letter, which has sunk deep 
nto my heart. When I heard of your sad affliction, as regards 


LETTER FROM LORD RODEN TO MR. SINCLAIR. 


IC5 


the flesh, I felt, though you were so severely and mercifully chas¬ 
tened of the Lord, that you would, after a little, see the import¬ 
ance of manifesting complete submission to the will of that 
glorious Lord who “ doeth all things well,” and who has con¬ 
nected Himself with every minute circumstance referring to 
the affairs of His children. I was in hopes that I should have 
heard of you before this, that you could have said, or that 
you could have forced yourself to say, “ It is the Lord : 
let Him do what seemeth Him good.” But my very dear old 
friend will forgive me for being faithful to him, and saying that 
he is sinning grievously against a God of mercy and love by 
finding fault with any of His dispensations, which I can’t but 
think is awfully expressed by you when you say, with a discon¬ 
tented mind at the time, “ Great is the mystery of godliness,” 
but you add to it, shall I say ?—yes, as one who loves you, I 
must say—you impiously add, “ Greater is the mystery of Provi¬ 
dence.” The indulgence you have given to this discontented 
frame of mind is surely sinful, by not exerting yourself as a 
man , and coming out to your duties, in spite of all personal 
feelings engendered and encouraged by the course of seclusion 
which you have adopted—feeding the sin by it, and throwing 
away from you “ the sovereign balm for every wound, the cor¬ 
dial for every fear,”—the certain , sure , unchangeable love of 
the Lord Jesus Christ to the vilest and greatest sinner that 
turns to Him in faith, falls down at His feet and acknowledges, 
udiatever may be the calamity, it is right , it is well, when it is 
the evident act of my God. My dear, kind, valued friend, let 
me implore of you to rouse yourself to remember your former 
profession, to By now to Jesus, and to show him your desire and 
determination, in His strength, not to continue in this awful sin 
of discontent—brooding over His unexplained acts, and contend¬ 
ing against God on account of them—but show to Him and to 
the Church that, whatever it may cost you, you will arise and go 
to your Father, and will say, “ Father, I have sinned against 
Thee in this un-Christian and rebellious grief in which I have 
indulged ; and I desire to be raised up again as an active ser¬ 
vant, or rather, son, in Thy house, to acknowledge, ‘ Though He 
slay me, yet ivill I trust in Him ; ’ nor shall my mind be pol¬ 
luted with this discontent and enmity against such a Master’s 


1GG 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


will and act, the reason of which I don’t see now, but shall see 
hereafter.” I have told your case to our dear friend Somerset 
Maxwell, whom you knew in Parliament, who is a dear servant 
of Jesus, and who longs to hear of your deliverance from the sad 
state in which you suffer yourself to be involved. But I would 
hope to see you here, my dear friend, when we could have some 
communion together, and where the Lord would bless our com¬ 
munion, and give you that peace which you have been rejecting. 
Do come, my dear Sinclair; the distance is very short from Bel¬ 
fast here,—only twenty-five miles,—and I would send half-way 
to meet }mu; and from Glasgow to Belfast steamers sail daily. 
We purpose remaining here till the 14th of next month. We 
then come back until the 25th to remain till the 6th or 7th of 
November; when I purpose taking my family to the south of 
England for the winter. We shall go from here via Glasgow 
and Edinburgh, which I want to show Lady Boden. 

I need not say you will be the subject of my poor prayers, 
that the Lord would, in His mercy, send His Spirit upon you to 
deliver you from the snare of Satan, and enable you to come 
forth still to praise Him, and say from the bottom of your heart, 
“ My Jesus doeth all things well!' If we were together I could 
speak to you from experience. I have had trials which nearly 
drove me mad at first,—lacerated the very cove of my heart ,— 
which I thought nothing could heal; but, dear friend, “ Nothing 
is too hard for the Lord;” and this very trial, which made heart 
and flesh rvince for many a year, still was the greatest blessing 
to my soul,—and ’tis of others,—so that I could lie dow r n in the 
dark at my Saviour’s feet, and say, with Job, “Wherefore I 
abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.” Then the Lord’s 
oil of peace was poured into my soul, and I could say, “ Bless 
the Lord, 0 my soul! and all that is within me bless His holy 
name.” I have only again, my dear old friend, to implore of 
you, in the name of our precious Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 
to escape from your indulged sin of discontent and murmuring. 
The door is open to get out; Jesus is the Way; and “Whoso¬ 
ever cometh to Him He will in no wise cast out.” I hope I have 
not written too strongly. I have asked the Lord to guide my 
pen in answering your letter, and I cannot rest satisfied in 
knowing you to be in such a state of wilful sin as your letter 


OTHER LETTERS OF LORD RODEN TO MR. SINCLAIR. 1G7 

depicts without giving you the word of a friend who loves you 
for your own sake, but far more for Christ’s sake, our adorable 
Lord. 

Always your affectionate Friend in Christ, 

Roden. 

I have a considerable number of Lord Roden's letters 
lying before me, all written in that sanctified tone, that 
pious strain, which for more than half a century have 
characterised the correspondence and conversation of the 
venerable nobleman. My only regret is, that I cannot 
allot a greater amount of space to them. I know how 
highly Lord Roden’s letters were prized by Sir George 
Sinclair, and in what estimation also they were and are 
held by the surviving members of his family. It is con¬ 
solatory to hope and trust that the day will come—may 
it, however, be distant—when some one else will do for 
the memory of Lord Roden what it is to me a labour 
of love to do for the memory of Sir George Sinclair, 
and then these letters will see the light, including that 
most valuable one, the last I have given. 



CHAPTER VIII. 


Correspondence with Prelates and the Clergy of the Church of England— 
Letter from Mr. Sinclair to the Archbishop of Canterbury—Letter to the 
Archbishop of Armagh—Letters from the late Dr. Phillpotts, Bishop of 
Exeter, and from Dr. Blomfield, formerly Bishop of London—Letters 
from the Bcv. Charles Simeon and the Rev. Dr. Croly. 

I have frequently referred in former chapters to the 
eminently religious character of Mr. Sinclair; and that 
naturally led him to form many friendships among the 
more eminent clergymen of the Church of England,— 
from the highest to the lowest orders of ecclesiastics. 
He corresponded on equally friendly terms with arch¬ 
bishops and curates; and by all of those with whom he 
thus carried on an interchange of views, whether by 
letter or personally, he was held in the highest esteem. 
But on no occasion in his intercourse, whether personally 
or in writing, with the clergy, did he allow the friendly 
feelings by which he was always actuated to impair in 
the slightest degree his fidelity to his Christian principles. 
These he always asserted in a courteous manner, but with 
an uncompromising adherence to those evangelical doc¬ 
trines which he rightly regarded as constituting the very 
essence of the Gospel. I find a remarkable illustration 
of this in a letter which he addressed, in 1824 , to Dr. 
Manners Sutton, Archbishop of Canterbury. Everyone 
who knew anything of the then occupant of Lambeth 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO THE ABF. OF CANTERBURY. 1G0 

Palace, knew that his theological views were of a per¬ 
fectly negative nature. They were of that Rationalistic 
class, which are now so common in our ecclesiastical 
establishment, and are represented by the Stanleys, the 
Temples, the Jowetts, the Kingsleys, the Maurices, and 
other theologians of that class,—if they at all deserve the 
name. But though the then Primate of All England 
entertained views which were altogether unworthy the 
name of religion, in the sense in which the Apostles 
regarded, and in which the Church of England still re¬ 
gards, the term,—he had a sufficient amount of worldly 
wisdom to prevent his open avowal of his heterodox 
opinions. At the time to which Mr. Sinclair refers, it 
was stated in the House of Commons—and the senti¬ 
ment met, as was to be expected from the composi¬ 
tion of that House, with no small sympathy there—that 
the Archbishop of Canterbury had publicly declared, on 
a particular occasion, his belief that there were some 
who call themselves Unitarians whom he regarded as 
being as good Christians as any others. So far as mere 
moral conduct was concerned, Mr. Sinclair would not 
have taken exception to the opinion thus expressed by 
the Archbishop; but when the sentiment was extended 
to one’s religious beliefs, it was otherwise. Accord¬ 
ingly, at the date I have mentioned, Mr. Sinclair 
addressed the following letter to the Archbishop of 
Canterbury :—• 

My Lord, 

It may appear highly presumptuous in a stranger to take the 
liberty of addressing your Grace ; but it is impossible for any one 
who is anxious for the honour of religion and the safety of the 
Church not to feel deeply grieved by the declaration lately 
uttered in the House of Commons, that your Grace considers 




170 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


there are some who call themselves Unitarians to be as good 
Christians as any others ! 

I cannot, for one moment, imagine that those who deny what¬ 
ever is most fundamental in the doctrines of Divine Truth, who 
stigmatise orthodoxy as blasphemous, who, like Priestley, are dis¬ 
satisfied with the Apostle Paul as a reasoner, and who count the 
blood of the covenant an unholy thing, in as far as it is regarded 
by Christians as the sofe ground of justification and acceptance,— 
I cannot imagine that your Grace can ever have placed them on 
a footing with those who rejoice in the Lord Jesus, and have 
no confidence in the flesh,—with those who admit, without con¬ 
troversy, the great mystery of godliness, God manifest in the 
flesh,—with those who acknowledge that the Word was with 
God, that the Word was God, and dwelt among men, and that we 
are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ 
once for all. But surely I need not suggest to your Grace’s 
superior discernment how dangerous it is that such sentiments 
should be ascribed, without contradiction, to the Metropolitan 
of the National Church. In another quarter they have even 
been boldly attributed to His Majesty; and in numerous publi¬ 
cations some of the brightest ornaments of the Church in dif¬ 
ferent ages have been calumniously numbered amongst the 
champions of blasphemers ; for if the denial of Christ’s divinity 
be not blasphemous, and if it be a venial, unimportant error to 
impugn the necessity of His sufferings, and deride the efficacy of 
His atonement, there is then, indeed, no such thing as a sin 
against the Holy Ghost. 

May I, then, presume to ask your Grace whether it is not as 
necessary to defend the doctrines of the Church against Uni¬ 
tarian infidelity as to protect its dignities and revenues against 
the Roman Catholic encroachment ? Oh that your Grace could 
be prevailed upon to stand manfully forward in the House of 
Lords, and, with that mild and temperate eloquence which has 
so often commanded their respect, would deign to mortify the 
presumption of arrogant incredulity, and to tranquillise the alarm 
of that fold over which you have been appointed as overseer, by 
professing your abhorrence of heresies, and your genuine attach¬ 
ment to the orthodox doctrines of the Gospel. 

It is unnecessary for the humble individual who addresses 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO THE ABP. OF CANTERBURY. 171 

your Grace to append his name to these few lines, in which he 
presumes “ to stir up your mind by way of remembrance.” He 
writes from a remote corner of the empire, where the doctrines 
of Carlisle and Belsham are held in great detestation, and are 
considered equally subversive of the salvation and happiness of 
the human race. 

I shall content myself with adding, that I have the honour to 
be, &c., &c. 

I venture to say that there was not to be found, at the 
time this letter was written to the head of the Hierarchy, 
a single occupant of a seat on the bench of bishops who 
could have, in the same space, given a more triumphant 
answer to the Primate,—none that could have more ably 
or successfullv established the truth of the great distinc- 
tive doctrines of the Gospel. There were, at that time, 
evangelical Lords Spiritual on the benches set apart to 
them in the Upper House,—more, indeed, than now, but 
1 never understood that even one of their number did 
battle with the Archbishop, for the momentous truths 
which lie had practically denied by his declaration that 
Unitarians were as good Christians as any other persons, 

-—meaning those holding evangelical views, and calling 
themselves by the latter name. 

In this letter of Mr. Sinclair there is everything to 
admire. It is intellectual and eloquent, as well as theo¬ 
logically sound. It is also firm in its adherence to prin¬ 
ciple, and fearless in its denunciations of the conduct of 
the man who, filling the highest position in the Estab¬ 
lished Church, was bound by the most solemn obliga¬ 
tions,—undertaken alike at his ordination, and again at 
bis several intermediate steps to the height, the very 
highest he could reach, to which he had then attained,— 
to defend at all times, and to the best of his ability, the 






172 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


doctrines of the Church of England, which are thoroughly 
opposed to Unitarianism as a system radically erroneous, 
and most perilous to those who have embraced it. 

Among the archbishops who were personal friends of 
Mr. Sinclair at and after the period at which the above 
letter to the Primate was written, was Dr. Beresford, 
Archbishop of Armagh. At this time, there was a 
Bev. Sanderson Bobins, well known as the incumbent of 
a church in St. John’s Wood, who stood high among the 
evangelical clergy. Mr. Sinclair admired his preach¬ 
ing and his general talents. He was especially struck 
with his intelligent .hostility to Popery in all its varied 
phases,— a system of religion which, till the latest hour of 
his life, he regarded with the most intense dislike. Mr. 
Sinclair having thus so high an opinion of Mr. Bobins, 
and believing that if he got some living in Ireland he 
would be of great service in opposing Popery in that 
country, wrote to the Archbishop of Armagh to see if he 
could do anything for Mr. Bobins in Ireland. The fol¬ 
lowing is the answer which Mr. Sinclair received to his 
letter to the Archbishop :— 

London, May 30. 

My dear Sir George Sinclair, 

Your note of the 24tli inst., which I yesterday received, 
brought back to my recollection with great pleasure the many 
occasions on which we used to meet in former days. The work 
of Mr. S. Bobins, to which you allude, I have not had, as yet, 
the opportunity of reading. As soon as I have examined it I 
shall hope to be able to recommend it to those of my clergy who 
are engaged in controversy with the Roman Catholics. It has 
been my rule in administering the patronage at my disposal to 
employ it in encouraging and rewarding the laborious curates 
who have spent the best of their days under my own eye in the 
work of the ministry; and I have abstained from introducing 
any strangers into the more valuable preferments, finding that 



LETTER FROM THE ABP. OF ARMAGH TO MR. SINCLAIR. 173 

my doing so would dishearten those who naturally look to me 
for advancement in their profession. My regret has been, that the 
number of benefices at my disposal has not been nearly sufficient 
to provide for all of those who are deserving of promotion ; so 
that there still remains in my diocese respectable curates of up¬ 
wards of twenty years’ standing as yet unbeneficed. I could not, 
therefore, offer preferment in the diocese of Armagh to the Rev. 
Mr. Robins. As to my recommending him to any of my English 
brethren for advancement, I feel that his merit being public 
service as the author of a valuable theological work, my stepping 
forward to suggest his name as deserving of promotion at their 
hands might be considered intrusive, inasmuch as the prelates 
in England had as good means of forming a judgment respect¬ 
ing his claims as I could have. There is a very useful and 
well-edited periodical published in Dublin on the Roman 
Catholic controversy ; it is called “ The Catholic Layman ; ” 
some of the most learned of the fellows of Trinity College write 
for it. It comes out monthly, and it has been conducted for 

V ' 

four years with so much fairness, good taste, and admirable 
temper, avoiding all bitterness of language, that I think you 
would like to see it. I, therefore, send copies of the two last 
numbers by this day’s post, and beg you to accept them. 

I remain, my dear Sir George, 

Yours faithfully, 

John G. Armagh. 

It was not to be regretted that the Archbishop of 
Armagh did not do anything for Mr. Robins, for soon 
afterwards the decidedly Protestant character of his 
creed grew smaller by degrees until it well-nigh ceased 
to have a being at all. He did not, it is true, pass over 
the hedge which separates Popery from Protestantism ; 
he still, until the time of his death, some years ago, 
remained in the Anglican Church ; but all his zeal for 
Protestantism evaporated, while as regarded Evangelicism, 
no one, I believe, could latterly discern a single trace of 
it in his creed. 


174 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Among Mr. Sinclair’s prelatic friends was the late Dr. 
Phillpotts, whose death occurred only a few months ago, 
at the very advanced age of ninety-three. I need not 
advert to his pre-eminent talents, as they were known 
and appreciated during his prolonged life, and more 
especially after he was raised to the Bench of Bishops, 
when both in his diocese and in the House of Lords 
they had a wider scope afforded them than before he had 
attained the distinction of a bishop. The following letter, 
addressed to Mr. Sinclair, was written by Dr. Phillpotts, 
in the year 1834, and was an answer to a letter written 
by Mr. Sinclair to him communicating some complimen¬ 
tary things which Dr. Chalmers—at that time the most 
popular divine in Christendom—had said of him. The 
conversation between Dr. Chalmers and Mr. Sinclair 
relative to the Bishop of Exeter, out of which Mr. 
Sinclair’s letter to the latter, and his answer, arose, took 
place at the time that Dr. Chalmers had just concluded a 
series of six lectures, in the Hanover Square Rooms, in 
favour of Church Establishments. The Bishop of Exeter, 
and Dr. Blomfield, the then Bishop of London, both 
attended these lectures, and listened to them—as I can 
state from personal observation—with the most profound 
attention, and, if any faith is to be placed in Lavater’s 
theory of physiognomy, with the greatest delight. But, 
apart from the matter of these lectures of Dr. Chalmers, 
there was something in the Doctor’s appearance and de¬ 
livery which, to a London audience, for the most part 
very intellectual, and of high social position, must have 
seemed very strange. His great massive head, his broad 
forehead, and white necktie,—thrown carelessly around 
his neck, and as crumpled as if he had slept in it the 




LETTER FROM DR. PHILLPOTTS TO MR. SINCLAIR. 


175 


previous niglit,—were tilings which, in combination, 
formed quite a study. Then there was the broad Scotch 
accent the broadest I have ever heard—falling all the 
more strangely on the English ear because of the anima¬ 
tion, the earnestness, and the energy with which lie spoke ; 
while, to add to the uniqueness of the scene, there was 
the curious sight of his spectacles falling off his nose 
with unfailing punctuality when he came to the con¬ 
cluding word in any of those more magnificent bursts of 
eloquence with which his lectures so largely abounded. 
Mr. Sinclair was present in the Hanover Square Eooms, 
as were many Bishops, Peers, Members of the House of 
Commons, and other distinguished persons, while Dr. 
Chalmers’s lectures were in course of delivery. I men¬ 
tion these facts, as rendering more intelligible than it 
would otherwise be, the following letter from the Bishop 
of Exeter. The letter was written in 1834, but I have a 
doubt as to the precise date :— 


My dear Sir, 

I beg you to accept my best thanks for your obliging letter. 
The approbation of such a man as Dr. Chalmers might be a 
source of honest pride to any man. I cannot affect to be indif¬ 
ferent to it on my own account ; but I hope I chiefly value it as 
a proof of the brotherly feeling which subsists between the most 
distinguished members of the Church of Scotland towards that 
branch of Christ’s Church which is established in England. If 
the effect of the common danger which now threatens every 
ancient institution be to draw the members of different and 
once rival communities nearer to each other, blessed so far is 
the visitation. Your own honourable purpose of supporting the 
Church of England is highly appreciated by me, and will be, I 
doubt not, by all my brethren. 

I thank you for your kind allusion to the other affair, and for 
the confidence which you express in my conduct on that occasion. 



17G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

I do not imagine that it is likely to become a matter of parlia¬ 
mentary discussion ; but, if it should, I shall be most proud of 
your kind aid. The very silly party, with whom I have had to 
do, has given me an opportunity (which a mere newspaper attack 
would not give) of putting forth my own statement. It appeared 
in one of our Exeter newspapers, and has been copied into the 
Standard. As it is possible that you may not have seen it, I 
beg leave to transmit a copy of it. I look forward to the pleasure 
of meeting you soon in London. May God enable us all to con¬ 
tend faithfully and fearlessly, yet in the spirit of Christian 
humility and charity, for that good cause which He has been 
pleased to confide in part to our care. 

Yours, my dear Sir, 

Most faithfully, 

H. Exeter. 

With Dr. Blomfield, for many years the Bishop of 
London, and, as such, the predecessor of Dr. Tait, now 
the Archbishop of Canterbury, Mr. Sinclair was very 
intimate, as I find from the tone of the letters of the 
latter to the former. They are, however, chiefly of a 
private nature. But in most of the letters of Dr. Blom- 
field, there were some references to whatever ecclesiasti¬ 
cal matters were attracting public attention at the time. 
The following is a fair specimen of the nature of the 
Bishop of London’s letters to Mr. Sinclair. It was ob¬ 
viously written about the same time as the one I have 
just quoted from the late Bishop of Exeter. It is dated 
“ Southend, Essex, September 1st, 1834 ” :— 

My dear Sir, 

Your letter has followed me to this place, where we are settled, 
with our children, for a few weeks, enjoying the sea breezes, 
and, I hope, benefiting by them. It is not true that I have 
changed my opinion as to the propriety of the vote which I gave 
against the Irish Tithe Bill. What I said to Lord Grey, a few 
days after its rejection, was this: that we had ventured upon a 


DR. COFLESTONE, BISHOF OF LLANDAFF. 177 

feaiful hazard, looking at the actual condition of the Irish clergy, 
but that I felt it impossible to sacrifice the principles which were 
violated in that bill for the sake of obtaining what would prove, 
after all, only a temporary settlement, and that, too, at the dic¬ 
tation of the bitterest enemy of the Church. I have since seen 
no reason to change my opinion, nor to repent of the course 
which I pursued. I hope that you will derive benefit from your 
native air, and return to the South in such a plight as may do 
credit to Scotland. If I am rightly informed, that Mrs. Sinclair 
remains at Ham House, we may have a chance of seeing you at 
Fulham on this side of Christmas. We shall probably return 
thither ourselves about the first week in October. I have great 
reason to be thankful that, amidst a very general sickness, all 
my numerous family have been quite well. Mrs. Blomfield 
desires to be very kindly remembered. 

Believe me, my dear Sir, 

With great regard, 

Yours most sincerely, 

C. J. London. 

I will give here only one more letter from a prelate. 
It is from Dr. Coplestone, the then Bishop of Llandaff. 
Dr. Coplestone was a distinguished classical scholar, but 
nothing can be said in favour of his theology. It was of 
the Broad Church character, although the phrase was 
not in his day applied to nationalistic opinions. In his 
theological views, the then Bishop of Llandaff was some 
fifteen or twenty years in advance of the Stanleys and 
Jowetts of the present time. It is, however, due to him 
to say, that he did not resemble the class of Rationalists 
represented by those whose names I have just mentioned, 
in relation to the bitterness of feeling which they cherish 
towards those who hold evangelical opinions. On the 
contrary, he always spoke with kindness of them. 
Mr. Sinclair has preserved several letters addressed to 
him by Dr. Coplestone, but in making a selection, I 




178 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


give one which is exceedingly interesting, as relating to 
the state of his health a number of years before he died, 
and which was called forth by allusions in a letter of Mr. 
Sinclair to his ill-health. I cannot help, in transferring 
this letter of the Bishop of Llandaff to these pages, 
noticing the curious fact, that it was written in the same 
year as the letters of the Bishop of Exeter and the 
Bishop of London, which I have given above. Dr. 
Coplestone's letter is dated— 

Lansanfread, near Monmouth, 

August 31st, 1834. 

My dear Sir, 

You little thought when you sent me this sad account of 
your health, how well qualified I was to sympathise with you. 
Ever since February I have been labouring under a chronic 
case, including dyspepsia, relaxation bodily and mental, sleepi¬ 
ness without sound sleep, and often such a degree of dejection 
and langour as makes life a burden. God’s will be done, this 
is my only support. There are indeed intervals of ease and 
cheerfulness and hope, but continual relapses have taught me 
to place no confidence in these flattering gleams, although I 
still entertain hopes that a day of relief will come. For three 
months after Easter I took a house in Whitehall Place, hoping 
to enjoy the society of friends, and to be able, with less incon¬ 
venience, to attend to all my public and professional duties. 
But this scheme failed entirely; three times I was driven to 
seek relief by a journey into Devonshire, where in the domestic 
society of relations, I certainly experienced comfort and some 
amendment. I am now at my proper post—in a beautiful 
country, and engaged in the various duties of the diocese—but 
to a friend I confess (what it would be imprudent to say gene¬ 
rally) that I am almost incapacitated for all enjoyment. I fear 
vultu simiilat, premit altum corde dolorum is but too true a 
description of my deportment in society, and this constant 
effort is rather more than my nature can sustain. The malady 
originated in the body, but it affects the mind grievously. The 
cure, I believe, must come from the body in such a case. No 


THE BISHOr OF LLANDAFF. 


179 


mental solace or employment will remove, although it may 
mitigate the evil. Yet I believe also that the political state of 
the country, especially as it affects our national church, aggra¬ 
vates the disease. I am thoroughly sick of the times. I dread 
the sight of a newspaper. The present is full of trouble, the 
future of dark and threatening appearances. Can we ever, I 
ask myself, expect to see the balance of the constitution re¬ 
stored ? Must not the popular feeling soon swallow up all the 
rest ? The Church and all the ancient institutions of the 
country will first be destroyed—then goes the House of Peers— 
then comes democracy in all its horrors. Forgive me, my dear 
friend, for pouring out my sorrows thus unreservedly. It affords 
some consolation to think that you will receive what I say 
with kindness, although you may dissent from my opinions, and 
may charge me with indulging in weak and morbid feelings. 

Believe me ever, 

Your faithful and attached friend, 

E. Llandaff. 

No one can read this letter without being pleasingly 
affected by the fine feeling by which it is pervaded so 
far as it relates to the Bishop’s illness. 

In connection with the Bishop of Llandaff, an in¬ 
teresting incident, accompanied by pleasing effects, has 
been related to me. Ham House, while the late Coun¬ 
tess of Dysart was the occupant, was celebrated alike 
for its hospitality and the social standing of those who 
were invited to dine there. On one occasion, an un¬ 
usually large and distinguished party had been invited 
to dine at Ham House. The Bishop of Llandaff was to 
be one of the guests, and when on his way along Fulham 
Bridge to fulfil his engagement, he said to Mr. Archibald 
Macdonald, son of Lord Macdonald, who accompanied 
him, “ Do y r ou know whom we are to meet ? It may be 
of little consequence to you, but it is sometimes a serious* 
matter for a Bishop.” Mr. Macdonald answered, “ Of 

N 2 


180 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

course you know that Sir Charles Wetherell is to be 
there?” “ Sir Charles Wetherell !” exclaimed the Bishop, 
“he is the very last mail in the world I should wish to 
meet. We are not on speaking terms. It was owing to 
me that he lost his seat in parliament for Oxford. I wish 
with all my heart I could return home at once. Mr. 
Macdonald, however, succeeded in persuading him to go 
on to Ham House; and on he and Sir Charles meeting in 
the drawing-room, Mr. Sinclair, observing that they did 
not recognise each other, naturally inferred, that the 
reason was that they were not personally acquainted, 
and under that impression introduced them to each 
other. The result, under the circumstances, might have 
proved very unpleasant to Lady Dysart and the com¬ 
pany, but Sir Charles, with great good nature, held out 
his hand to the Bishop, and a reconciliation between 
them was immediately effected, which was of permanent 
duration. 

I could not think of mentioning the name of Sir Charles 
Wetherell without making a few remarks in relation to 
him. To the greater part of the present generation, it is 
not improbable that even his name may be unknown; 
but fifty, or even forty years ago, there was no name 
which was more prominently before the public than his. 
The observation holds equally true, whether Sir Charles be 
regarded as a chancery barrister or a member of parlia¬ 
ment. In the former capacity he occupied the first place. 
No one surpassed him at the equity bar. As a member 
of the Legislature, it could not be said that he was at all 
to be compared to Brougham, or Canning, or Peel, or 
others whose names might be mentioned ; but still there 
were few members of the House of Commons who were 


SIR CHARLES WETHERELL. 


181 


better known than Sir Charles Wetherell. He was 
unique, in relation alike to his dress and his deportment. 
No Jew old-elotliesman would, at any time, have given 
lialf-a-crown for his whole wardrobe. He was never 
known to have a new suit of clothes, and consequently 
the prevailing belief was, that he must have dealt in the 
apparel line with some second-hand clothesman. And 
to make matters worse in the way of his costume, he 
never wore braces. His aversion to them was intense. 
It looked as if it had been part of his religious creed, 
never to have anything to do with braces. Professional 
preferment was, no doubt, to him, as to all barristers, 
a thing which was in itself much to be desired, but I 
verily believe that had the Woolsack itself been offered to 
Sir Charles, clogged with the condition that he should 
wear braces as all other men did, he would have rejected 
the offer because of the condition annexed to it. The 
natural consequence of his persistent hostility to braces 
was, that he had constantly to give a shrug to his whole 
body, in order to raise his nether garments to their 
proper position on his person. Though this was not so 
awkward in the Court of Chancery, where he had the 
advantage of his silk gown to conceal in part the appear¬ 
ance of his physical motions, it was often very awkward 
when witnessed in the House of Commons, and re¬ 
peatedly called forth bursts of laughter. 

In other respects as well, Sir Charles ministered 
largely to the amusement of the house. He had naturally 
a singularly solemn countenance, which assumed an in¬ 
describably lugubrious expression when he said anything 
humorous. And this he often did, to the infinite amuse¬ 
ment of the Commons. But what made his drollery 


182 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


irresistible was the circumstance of his countenance ex¬ 
pressing a seeming utter amazement at the fact of the 
house laughing at all, still more that they should be con¬ 
vulsed with laughter. He paused in his speech, and looked 
round, as if he intended to say, with mingled wonder 
and indignation, “ What are you all laughing at?” In 
imagination, at this very moment, after the lapse of more 
than thirty years, I can see the countenance of Sir Charles 
Wetherell, as it appeared on those occasions, as vividly as 
if I had seen it only an hour ago. 

His matter was in happy keeping with the oddity of 
his manner. Though a man of eminent talents, he used 
to make strange blunders in his language. He re- 

o o o 

minded me much of the Lord Castlereagh who, in 1820 , 
was the leader of the House of Commons, and who used 
to make such blunders as “standing prostrate at the 
feet of royalty,” and “ turning his back on himself.” One 
of the best blunders,—if “best” be the right word in such 
a case,—of which I have heard as committed by Sir Charles 
Wetherell, was told me by an eminent barrister. It 
occurred, not in the House of Commons, but at the bar. 
As Attorney-General, he had to prosecute John Frost and 
the other Monmouthshire Chartist rioters—some would 
say rebels—nearly thirty years ago. It will be in the re¬ 
membrance of all who had reached the years of maturity 
at that time, that a very serious rising against the 
Government took place near Newport in Monmouth¬ 
shire. As counsel for the prosecution, Sir Charles had, of 
course, to make out the strongest case he could against 
the prisoners. After hurling his invectives in no niggard 
measure at the heads of the prisoners at the bar, he 
wound up his forensic indignation to what he thought 

<o 





SIR CHARLES WETIIERELL. 


183 


tlie highest point it could reach, and which grammarians 
would call a confusion of metaphors, in the following 
words :— u Yes, my Lord, these daring rebels,—these des¬ 
perate men,—these enemies of all law and social order, 
came rushing down the mountain’s side like a flock of 
bees, each with a hatchet in its hand.” 

But with all Sir Charles Wetherells oddities, he was 
one ot the most upright and independent men that ever 
practised at the bar, or sat in the House of Commons. 
It was, if I remember rightly, Horace Walpole who said 
that every man had his price. This never was true 
of Sir Charles Wetlierell. He was unpurchaseable all 
through his public career. The Duke of Wellington once 
tried him by one of the most tempting offers which could 
have been made to him. It may be doubted whether 
there was a single man within the limits of the British 
empire who was more strenuously opposed than he to Ca¬ 
tholic Emancipation ; and the circumstance of his being 
member for the University of Oxford at the time when 
the question had reached a crisis, invested his opposition or 
advocacy with a special importance. The Duke of Wel¬ 
lington, who was then Prime Minister, offered Sir Charles 
the Lord Chancellorship, if he would only support the 
Government in their efforts to pass their measure of 
Catholic Emancipation. Sir Charles unhesitatingly re¬ 
jected the offer, and in language which sufficiently ex¬ 
pressed the indignation which he felt at the offer being 
made. 

But to return from this digression. Mr. Sinclair was on 
terms of intimacy with other bishops, but I must not 
devote any more of my space to his correspondence with 
them. Neither must I quote many letters to him from 




184 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

the untitled clergy, which I find in the voluminous papers 
placed in my hands as the materials for this volume. I 
will content myself with giving three letters Irom clergy¬ 
men who were not only without bishoprics, hut without 
deaneries, or canonries, or any distinctive ecclesiastical 
titles. The first two were written by the Rev. Charles 
Simeon, of Cambridge. Mr. Simeon’s clerical history 
is a remarkable and interesting one. He came out at 
Cambridge as a decided evangelical, towards the close of 
the last century, when he was a very young man. The 
Rev. Henry Martin, the celebrated Indian missionary, 
became his curate in 1802 . At this time there were 
comparatively few evangelicals among the clergy in any 
part of the country, but in Cambridge Evangelicism was 
probably more unpopular than in any other town of 
equal population in England. Mr. Simeon’s evangelical 
views rendered him so obnoxious alike to the professors 
and the students in the University, that the former would 
purposely, though seemingly as if by accident, push him off 
the pavement as he was walking along the streets, while 
the students would actually hoot him when they met him 
in the public thoroughfares. The very mention of his 
name was received with opprobrium. Yet he stedfastly 
adhered to his principles, which he practically embodied 
in a consistent walk and conversation. The result was 
that he not only lived down, in the course of time, the 
hostility with which he was regarded and the calumnies 
by which he was attacked in the earlier years of his 
ministry, but he rose so high in public estimation—even 
in the case of those who had been formerly most virulent 
in their feelings and words against him—that there was 
no one either in Cambridge, or in the religious world 


LETTER FROM THE REV. C. SIMEON TO MR. SINCLAIR. 185 

generally, whose character was held in higher esteem 
than that of Mr. Simeon. The full amount of the in¬ 
fluence he exercised in spreading evangelical views 
through the length and breadth of the land, will never 
be known in this world. It will be one of those revela¬ 
tions which are reserved for that “hereafter” which is 
presented to us in Scripture in contrast with “ now.” 
But there is one fact which of itself speaks with a voice 
as expressive as volumes could do in relation to the 
estimation in which Mr. Simeon was held in his later 
days. I allude to the great fact that no fewer than four 
hundred clergymen, with no inconsiderable number of 
laymen, came from all parts of the country to attend his 
funeral. So far as I know, this practical demonstration 
of affectionate regard for a deceased clergyman, has only 
one parallel, and that was in the case of the celebrated 
Dr. Chalmers. 

The first of the two letters from Mr. Simeon which I 
will give is dated— 

King’s College, Cambridge, 

Nov. 17, 1823. 

My very dear Sir, 

You will wonder that you have never yet received an acknow¬ 
ledgment of the kindness you expressed towards me in sending 
me a printed copy of your speech at Thurso on the subject of 
the Bible Society. But the fact is, that I have so many reports 
sent to me from every quarter, and such a continual pressure of 
important business on hand, that I am not able to read half that 
are sent to me. But I had a particular reason for delaying to 
read yours. I knew that our own Bible Society would be in this 
month, and I thought I would defer the reading of }x>ur speech 
till the evening preceding our own Society, that so I might derive 
from it matter for the edification of our own people. I have 
this moment perused your speech, according to my intention, 
and am truly glad to find so noble a testimony in behalf of true 


180 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


religion issuing from your lips and your pen. Happy would it 
be if all who advocate the circulation of the Bible made such 
good use of it at home, or entered so fully into its contents. 
May you, my dear Sir, experience more and more the sweetness 
and efficacy of its doctrines, and have your whole life cast into 
its blessed mould ! This is the earnest wish and prayer of, 

My dear Sir, 

Your much obliged and 

Very affectionate servant, 

C. Simeon. 

Though there is nothing remarkable in this letter, 
it will, without doubt, give great pleasure to the myriads 
who fondly cherish the memory of Mr. Simeon to read 
anything from his pen which has not before seen the 
light. 

The second letter from Mr. Simeon to Mr. Sinclair was 
written thirteen years after the first. Mr. Simeon is here 
somewhat playful in his remarks on the difference be¬ 
tween a sovereign and a guinea. The letter is dated— 


Trinity College, Cambridge, 

May 12, 1836. 

My dear Sir George, 

I feel extremely thankful to you for your kind present, and 
very especially for your self-inflicted tine, which marks the degree 
in -which your heart accompanied the donation. It brought 
strongly to my mind a thought I have ever cherished since 
guineas ceased to be current. I have always felt that they very 
essentially differed from pounds ,—the pounds arguing liberality, 
but the additional shillings evincing heart. In this respect your 
donation spoke loudly, but your fine with double force. But it 
is, in truth, a cause which may well call forth the heart, since 
the occasion never arose before, nor ever can be expected to 
exist again ; so that, though a box of ointment of spikenard 
be very precious, the pouring of it on our Saviour’s head is no 
waste, seeing that the poor we have always with us, and other 



THE HEY. DR. CROLY. 


187 


calls for charity we may obey at some future time ; but this 
opportunity once lost, is lost for ever. 

With much gratitude, I remain, my dear Sir George, 

Your most obedient servant, 

C. Simeon. 

I date this as from Cambridge, though I am, in fact, at Lady 
Olivia Sparrow’s, at Brampton Park, near Huntingdon ; and 
she desires her kind regards to you. 

The only other letter which I give, from a clergyman 
who could not boast of high titles, was written by the 
late Dr. Croly. He was a very particular friend, and, 
for many years, until his death, a frequent correspondent 
of Mr. Sinclair, after he had succeeded to the baronetcy. 
Dr. Croly, with whom I was on terms of intimacy for 
the last ten or twelve years of his life, which ended in 
1861 , was a man of great talents and varied literary 
acquirements. He was the author of many works, both 
in prose and poetry, which, at the time of their publica¬ 
tion, obtained great popularity, and some of which—his 
“ Salathiel,” for instance—are read at the present day. 
His “ Life of Burke,” too, is a work which is still highly 
and deservedly prized. It is an interesting fact, that 
probably no instance could be pointed out in the annals 
of our literature, in which there was so remarkable a 
similarity in the style of any two authors as in that of 
Burke and Dr. Croly,—and this not the result of the 
latter imitating the former, for Dr. Crolyh style was 
as natural as Burke’s was to him. He was a man of 
powerful mind. He was an able divine, as well as a 
gifted and popular author in various departments of 
literature. A more zealous Protestant than Dr. Croly 
was not to be found either in the Church of England or 
in any other denomination. Some of the best things 



188 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


which were ever written in opposition to Popery, arid in 
favour of Protestantism, proceeded from his pen. Yet, 
notwithstanding all his great talents and varied acquire¬ 
ments, he never made any progress in the Church, so far 
as regarded the honours and emoluments which she had 
to bestow. He lived and died as simple Rector of St. 
Stephen’s, Walbrook, London,—the living, after de¬ 
ducting certain inevitable expenses attaching to it, not 
being worth more than about £400. Sir George Sinclair 
never ceased to lament that a man so eminently gifted 
and so devoted to the Church, should thus have been 
allowed to live in a humble Rectory, with such limited 
emoluments as were attached to it; and he did everything 
in his power to prevail on those who had ecclesiastical 
patronage to dispense, to obtain a practical recognition of 
Dr. Croly’s claims to preferment; but all his efforts were 
unsuccessful. I shared the sentiments of Sir George on 

O 

this point. It is true, that though Dr. Croly was one of 
the ablest advocates of the great doctrines which consti¬ 
tute the life and soul of Christianity,—such as the inspi¬ 
ration of the Scriptures, the divinity of Christ, the per¬ 
sonality and divinity of the Holy Spirit, the Atonement, 
&c.—there were some minor points on which he and I 
differed. But then, time after time, I saw clergymen 
receiving honours and emoluments in the Church whose 
opinions were at variance with the Thirty-nine Articles, 
and other parts of the Prayer Book, and who, in point of 
ability and accomplishments, could not be named in the 
same breath with Dr. Croly. 

As a friend and companion, Dr. Croly was one of the 
most warm-hearted and pleasant men I ever met with. 
Is otwithstanding the depth of his disappointment that he 





LETTER FROM DR. CROLY TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. ISO 


had been so ungenerously and unjustly neglected by the 
Church and by others who had it in their power to recog¬ 
nise and practically reward merit, he always possessed, 
when in society, a great flow of spirits. His fund of anec¬ 
dotes, in all varieties, was inexhaustible, and he told them 
with a freshness and effect, which, no less than the anec¬ 
dotes themselves, delighted all who were privileged to hear 
them. In the pulpit he was often carried away by his 
subject. On one occasion I heard him, in the fervour of 
the moment, address a mixed congelation—the female 
sex forming probably a full proportion—as “gentlemen/’ 
instead of in the usual phraseology of “ my dear 
hearers,” or “ my Christian friends.” 

The following is a letter from Dr. Croly to Sir George 
Sinclair. It is a fair specimen of the playfulness, raci¬ 
ness, and originality with which he always wrote. 
Nearly all his letters to me were written in a strain 
similar to that of the letter which I subjoin :— 

London, November 17, 1858. 

9, Queen Square, Bloomsbury, W. C. 

My dear Sir George, 

I am always glad to hear from you. If you call Thurso Castle 
“ a hermitage,” I am sure it is more honoured by its inmates 
than if any dozen of wanderers, with the longest beards and most 
sanctified visages of Italy played the part of antique hermit of 
the world within its embowering ivy and moss-covered stones. 
I am gratified by pitting your lively letter against your register 
of health. No invalid can take such spirited views, either of 
the gravities or levities of the day. 

Your little pamphlet on Mr. North is a very remarkable thing, 
and though I have great distrust in the stories of instantaneous 
conversion—and there certainly is no example in Scripture to 
countenance such convulsionaives as the converts of Whitefield 
and Wesley falling down in fits, and screaming out conviction ; 
—nay, I think there is no miracle of instant conversion but 




190 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


that of St. Paul, which was made instantaneous for a sign of the 
power of God, to change the persecutor almost in the very act 
of persecution,—an evidence which, in the first age of a perse¬ 
cuted Church, must have given a high confirmation to the new 
and trembling faith. Yet I can perfectly conceive a precise point 
of tirrie from which it may please the Ploly Spirit to give the 
first living sense of religion. I believe this from personal recol¬ 
lection. When in the University of Dublin I knew a student, of 
my own age, who, though not at all of a dissipated mind, but 
rather of religious habits, had only a very tardy and routine 
idea of religion. One evening, walking with a fellow-student, 
the conversation accidentally turned upon death. In the course 
of it my friend was struck with a sudden sensibility to spiritual 
considerations, which exceeded all that he had ever felt before, 
—a fine sense, a keenness of conception, a sudden flash of feel¬ 
ing, that nearly brought tears into his eyes, though he had no 
affectation of refinement in anything, and was of rather a calm, 
if not a cold, temperament,—a reasoning and grave being. That 
evening gave him an impulse, a strong direction of his thoughts, 
a solemn and deep impression on the very material of his mind, 
an opening of the folds of his heart, which never left him through 
life. 

I have spent some hours to-day under the dome of St. Paul’s, 
attending the bishop’s first visitation. There were, perhaps, 800 
or 1000 clergy, and a crowd of people besides. I was shivering 
from the first. The east wind is blasting every face in the streets, 
and the lofty dome was an air-bath. I was unwarmed by the 
discourse,—which was read, and was a volume, —for I could not 
hear a syllable of it. It may have been eloquent, but no human 
lungs can fill St. Paul’s. We must not attempt to emulate the 
pomps of Italy. Rome would have filled the area with harpers 
and trumpeters, relieved the mountain of stone with banners, 
and substituted cardinals, and mitred heads, and tissued robes, 
and acolytes with censors, for our black-gowned and gloomy- 
looking tribe of clergy. We must give up the rivalry. The 
tailor and the trumpeter are too many for us. 

I am, dear Sir George, 

Yours very sincerely, 

George Croly. 


SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR AND DISSENTING MINISTERS. 191 


There is one point in this letter of Dr. Croly from 
which I differ. He is mistaken when he says there is no 
one instance of sudden conversion recorded in the Scrip¬ 
ture, except that of Paul. On the contrary, there are 
many. Not only were there individual cases of instan¬ 
taneous conversions, as in the case of the Philippian 
jailor, but whole households believed and were saved at 
once ; while, on a memorable occasion, no fewer than 
three thousand were converted by one sermon preached 
by Peter. 

Sir George Sinclair, I ought to mention, carried on a 
correspondence with the late celebrated Pev. John Angell 
James, of Birmingham, and other distinguished dissenting 
ministers, but the claims which the letters of statesmen 
and persons of great eminence in the world of literature 
have upon me preclude the possibility of my devoting 
space to any portion of his correspondence with the 
descendants of the Nonconformists of the seventeenth 
century. 


CHAPTER IX. 


Mr. Sinclair’s Friendship with Sir Francis Burdett—Letters of the Latter to 
the Former—Mr. John Wilson Croker and the Quarterly Review—Mr. 
Croker’s Correspondence with Mr. Sinclair. 

The friendship of Mr. Sinclair with Sir Francis Bur¬ 
dett during a long period was a fact,—indeed, I might 
say, a great historical fact,—from the time of its forma¬ 
tion previous to the year 1815, till the death of the 
latter, which took place in the year 1844. I presume 
an intimacy must have been formed between them soon 
after Mr. Sinclair entered Parliament in 1811, because I 
find soon after that period, that Sir Francis Burdett 
addressed him as “ Dear Sinclair/’ “ My dear Sinclair,” 
&c. Passing over several letters from Sir Francis to Mr. 
Sinclair, on the ground of their being chiefly of a private 
nature, the first I will lay before my readers is one dated 
u Batli, Jan. 28tli, 1823.” It relates to various topics 
of public interest, and contains some playful remarks on 
a not very playful subject, namely, the gout, to which 
he was a terrible martyr. The Government of the day, 
so severely condemned by Sir Francis Burdett, was that 
of Lord Liverpool. 

Bath, January 28tli, 1823. 

My dear Sinclair, 

Your prompt and therefore very obliging attention to the 
desire expressed in my last, to procure some of Burns’ auto- 




LETTER FROM SIR F. BURDETT TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 193 

graphs for Lady Burdett demands my earliest thanks; and such 
a specimen is, in our estimation, invaluable, for we are all en¬ 
thusiastic admirers of Burns. 

The weather here has suddenly changed ; and although no¬ 
thing is duller than a great thaw, yet, after such severity of frost, 
nothing is more agreeable. As to hunting, a slight attack of my 
old enemy, the gout, puts that at present out of question. As 
I have, however, attacked him, in my turn, by Dr. Scudamore’s 
medicines, and have already checked his rage, I trust he will be 
quite driven away before the meeting of Parliament. I have 
already been subjected by him to a great mortification in being 
disabled from attending the meeting of the County of Berks for 
Beform. 4! hope you have seen the account of the grand meet¬ 
ing of the grand County of York. There spoke the gentlemen of 
England, and they will not have spoken in vain. Hereford, also, 
did itself great honour upon a similar occasion; and I hope Berk¬ 
shire will do the same. I have written to propose our following 
the lead of Yorkshire ; and that all reformers should lay aside 
all differences of opinion, and enlist under the banner of York¬ 
shire, headed by Lord Milton, whose honest and able speech at 
the meeting does him immortal honour. How unlucky Canning 
is getting in his “ escapades ” in his last Liverpool speech on this 
subject of Reform! 

As to the Whigs,—would that foolish appellation were drop¬ 
ped,—playing their cards well,—nay, rather, honestly, let them 
stick to Reform and the nation will stick to them ; and, with 
the nation at their back, possessing among them splendid 
talents, they will become irresistible, and put an end to the present 
miserable, mawkish, feeble, and corrupt, and blind, and foolish 
system. As to parties, they are all intolerable. There is no 
such crime as not being of this or that party. I doubt whether 
your Tory predilections are greater than my own. You know 
that in the House of Commons I have always professed myself 
a Tory. However, I am neither that nor Whig. 

“ In moderation placing all my glory, 

Tlie Tories call me Whig, and Whigs a Tory.” 

Yours sincerely, 

F. Burdett. 


o 


194 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


This letter was accompanied by one from Lady Bur- 
dett, in which she shows her high appreciation of the 
genius, and her admiration of the writings, of Burns. 
She says : “ I cannot allow Sir Francis’s letter, unac¬ 
companied with one from my own hand, to convey to 
you my cordial thanks for your very friendly prompti¬ 
tude in executing the commission I ventured to send 
you through him. Pray accept these thanks, with addi¬ 
tional ones, for your further obliging offer of procuring 
other autographs for me; they will be most acceptable, 
either of the celebrated dead or living. I Should so 
much wish to know which of Burns’ ballads he alludes 
to in his delightful letter. Would it be possible for you 
to have this ascertained, also the probable date of this 
letter,—there being none affixed to it \ ” 

I may here remark, that what is said in these two 
letters shows how popular the Scotch poet, Robert Burns, 
was among the higher classes in England,—as he was 
among all classes in his own country. Nothing indeed 
surprises or gratifies me more than to find that such is 
the case down to the present hour. Wherever I go, 
equally amongst persons of high social position in 
England, as among those in the humblest walks of life, 
I find universal admiration expressed of the writings 
of Burns, as the result of an intimate acquaintance 
with them. This is all the more surprising, when it 
is remembered that probably the greater portion of the 
poetical works of Burns is written in the Scottish 
language, which may be regarded in some sense as par¬ 
taking more of a foreign character than even the Latin, 
the French, or the Italian, as the latter languages are 
taught in the higher classes of English schools, and 



FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN SIR F. BURDETT AND MR. SINCLAIR. 195 

are more or less spoken, while the Scotch language is 
neither taught nor spoken on this side of the Tweed. 

Those who are old enough to have lived in the days 
of William Cobbett, will remember that he was every¬ 
where called “ Old Cobbett/’ years before his age could 
have justified the title. The origin of the application of 
the adjective “old,” to him was the delight which he 
took in his “ Weekly Register,” in calling Sir Francis 
Burdett “ Old Glory,” Suggested to him by the couplet 
which is quoted by him in the above letter, relative 
to the Tories calling him a Whig, and the Whigs a 

m 

1 ory. 

Probably there never subsisted between two persons 
a friendship so equally intimate, warm, uninterrupted, 
and prolonged as that which existed between Mr. Sinclair 
and Sir Francis Burdett. They were spoken of as the 
Damon and Pythias of the nineteenth century. For very 
many years, when both were in London, there was hardly 
a day in which they did not spend hours together. 
There was, too, a wonderful accord between them on 
most of the great political questions of the day. They 
both commenced their parliamentary career as Liberals. 
For a time, it is true, Sir Francis was on some points 
much the more liberal of the two; but on the questions 
of an abridged duration of parliaments, an extension of 
the franchise, and the vote by ballot,—the engrossing poli¬ 
tical questions in the early part of the second quarter of 
the present century,—there was a cordial concurrence of 
sentiment between them. But some time after the passing 
of the Reform Bill of 1832, they severally and about the 
same time, modified their views, as to the propriety of 
further representative reform. They thought that Reform 


19G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


had gone for the present far enough, and consequently, 
in giving expression to that view, they not only in the 
House of Commons warmly opposed any further progress 
in the way of parliamentary reform, hut went on a tour 
through the northern counties of England in order that 
they might give greater practical effect to the alteration 
which had taken place in their political sentiments. 
Everywhere they received a most enthusiastic welcome 
by immense masses of the people gathered together for 
the purpose. In some places, indeed, their reception 
assumed the shape of an ovation. The newspapers of the 
day devoted a large amount of their space to reports of 
what took place at the great demonstrations, and to 
leading articles on the effects on the public mind, made 
. in their favour. Nor was their mission without the results 
which they sought to accomplish through its means. 
Still sustaining the character of friends of Reform, though 
dreading and opposing the tendency which was then 
visible towards democracy in the shape of, first, the 
“ Five,” and afterwards the “ Six Points of the Charter,” 
they contributed largely to bring about that modification 
of the political creed of the masses which soon afterwards 
took place. 

Sir Francis Burdett was one of the greatest martyrs to 
the gout of whom we read in modern times, and he was 
often a great sufferer from illnesses arising from other 
causes. Yet, amidst all his pains, he not only showed 
great cheerfulness, but usually made them the subject 
of jocularity. In a letter to Mr. Sinclair, dated “ St. 
James s Place, October 30, 1833,” he adverts in the 
following terms to a fall from his horse, and to the con¬ 
sequences which resulted from the accident, “ This,” he 


MR. PENN, A FRIEND OF SIR FRANCIS BURDETT. 


197 


says, “ though not ‘ dun revenant des morts / is ‘ dun 
revenant de la mort! My brother ought to have in¬ 
formed you and Tracey of my narrow escape from being 
upset by a kicking horse in my tilbury last Saturday. 
My lucky star, however, stuck by me, and by a sort of 
miracle I broke no bones, and got no injury except 
bruises and a fit of the gout, which you know acts 
towards me the part Shakspeare says Scotland used 
formerly to act towards England—that of the weasel 
to the eagle when that noble bird was not at prey. 
I am writing from bed, and pain, owing to a large 
dose Chambers”—[an eminent physician at the period 
in question]—“ prescribed me last night, of the divine 
colchicum, Homer s nepenthe, no doubt, by aid of which 
1 hope to get back to Brighton in a couple of days. Pray 
ask your physician about it; but I am told it is at 
least efficacious for rheumatism. It is delightful and 
wonderful to have great effects produced by a dose so 
small. Sixty drops are a very large dose. Chambers 
says, that for one sort of rheumatism, the inflammatory, 
which much resembles gout, he thinks it is specific. I 
will tell Lady Burdett all you say about morphia. I 
have some time been anxious she should try it, but as 
you know, she, like Macbeth, though on a very different 
account, is for throwing physic to the dogs.” 

Before I proceed further I ought to remark, in relation 
to the frequency with which the word “ Penn ” occurs in 
the letters of Sir Francis, that Mr. Penn was a some¬ 
what eccentric character, who was constantly with Sir 
Francis, and by certain little oddities ministered much 
to his amusement. Mr. Penn was a gentleman of high 
family connections, and lived and died in the belief 



198 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


that lie was the rightful heir to estates in Pennsyl¬ 
vania which, had he obtained possession of them, would 
have made him one of the richest and greatest men in 
England. 

I pass over various letters from Sir Francis Burdett to 
Mr. Sinclair, which were written in the interval of time 
which took place between The date of the letter which 
I have just transferred to my pages and the one which 
I am about to give. They are all written in a most 
friendly tone, and show the profound regard which 
Sir Francis entertained for Mr. Sinclair. The letter 
which I now extract from the multitude of letters lying 
before me, written by Sir Francis Burdett to the 
subject of these Memoirs, is dated, “ Brighton, Decem¬ 
ber 7th, 1833/' and refers in very feeling terms to a 
domestic bereavement which Mr. Sinclair had just before 
sustained. The letter of Sir Francis is not only full 
of fine sympathies, but is pervaded by a philosophical 
spirit which all must admire. Omitting, on account of 
private references to certain temporary domestic troubles, 
a portion of the letter, it is as follows :— 

Brighton, Dec. 7th, 1833. 

My dear Sinclair, 

I have purposely delayed answering your last because affliction, 
when recent, admits of no consolation; hut after a time the 
words of friendship and sympathy find their place, and soothe 
at least lacerated feelings, though they cannot heal them. I need 
hardly say that every one here feels as I do on the subject, and 
particularly for Mrs. Sinclair; all beg you to express their sym¬ 
pathy for her, and unite in love to you. /, also, have my sor¬ 
rows. [A reference is here made to domestic circumstances.] 
It is very grievous. However, I do not allow it to cast me down. 
No one can, or deserves to, be happy who dwells only upon mis¬ 
fortunes, and overlooks every advantage. My philosophy is of a 


SIR FRANCIS BURDETT AND WILLIAM THE FOURTH. 199 


different cast, and makes me, like my friend Horne Tooke, con¬ 
tented and grateful; indeed, I have abundant reason to be so; 
notwithstanding I cannot boast of being cheered by Royal smiles, 
and am ready, in this case, to oppose the civic powers. 

The Whittle Harvey case will soon be determined ; it lies in 
a nutshell; it depends solely on a fact or two. By the time you 
get this it will probably be decided. I cannot say I have the 
admiration for his talents you express, but would take the same 
pains to obtain justice for one man as for another. 

Kind regards to Mrs. Sinclair. 

I am, my dear Sinclair, 

Yours sincerely, 

F. Burdett. 

Letters of sincere sympathy, and overflowing with 
affection, from a number of friends written to Mr. 
Sinclair on a great domestic bereavement which he had 
sustained about this time, are to be found among the 
papers confided to my care. As I shall have occasion 
hereafter to lay before my readers letters of condolence 
consequent on a bereavement, which Mr. Sinclair felt 
even more deeply than the one to which I have alluded, 
I will confine myself in this instance to Sir Francis Bur¬ 
dett’s sympathetic letter to his friend. 

About this time Sir Francis Burdett, with his three 
daughters, dined with William the Fourth. The date of 
the letter alluding to the honour of dining with royalty 
is not given, but the following is the letter itself:— 

Dear Sinclair, 

I have long thought of writing you a line, but have been so 
much about hunting, that I have put it off and put it off, as 
Dame Quickly says Sir John did his debt to her. However, I 
was very glad to receive a line from you, though it did not bring 
anything like a satisfactory account of your health. As to the 
speakers, I shall do just as you intend to do ; and I do not think 
the Whigs will gain any laurels, even by victory, of which they 



200 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


say they are certain, but they are apt to be out in their calcula- 
" tions. I dined the other day with the king and my three 
daughters; nothing could be more kind than his conduct, and 
that of them all. He was in good health and spirits, and very 
cheerful,—drank wine with me several times, and put me in 
mind of his having been present at my marriage, &c. I should 
think he receives such accounts of Sir Robert and the Duke as 
make him feel assured of the Government meeting with support; 
the opponents are equally confident. I, of course, know too little 
to form any confident opinion, but am inclined to think that the 
ministry will be able to go on. O’Connell’s conduct will, I think, 
strengthen them exceedingly, and his new-born zeal for the 
Whigs do them much mischief. Altogether, one’s situation gets 
more and more difficult,—I mean the situation of one having 
no object but the public good, and hating both parties, and so 
exclaiming—“ A plague on both your houses.” 

I subscribe myself, 

My dear Sinclair, 

Yours very sincerely, 

F. Burdett. 

It was while Sir Francis Burdett and Mr. Sinclair were 
thus not only in the zenith of their personal friendship 
for each other, and habits of hourly intimacy, but taking 
an active conjoint part in the endeavour to arrest the 
rapidly rising tide of democracy, that the father of the 
latter died. The year in which Sir John Sinclair died, 
and Mr. Sinclair succeeded to his title and estates as Sir 
George Sinclair, was 1835. From what I have said of Sir 
John in the first chapter of this work, it will be readily 
inferred that his death filled with regret the public mind 
of Scotland, in every part of which he was known and held 
in the highest estimation. In England, too, among the 
higher and middle classes, his death was much regretted. 
But the fact that his successor to the baronetcy was 
a man of distinguished talents and high character— 


THE WESTMINSTER ELECTION OF 1837. 


201 


respected and loved wherever known—moderated the 
regret with which intelligence of Sir Johns death was 
everywhere received, hut especially in his native land, for 
which he had done an incalculable amount of good, and 
whose reputation he had done so much to raise in the 
eyes of the world. Sir George Sinclair was universally 
felt to be the worthy successor of Sir John Sinclair— 

“ the worthy son of a worthy sire/’ And the opinion 
thus entertained of Sir George on his accession to the * 
baronetcy and family estates of Ulbster, in Caithness, was 
amply borne out, as will be seen in the succeeding pages, 
by his conduct and character throughout the whole of the 
remainder of his life. 

In the year 1837, a general election took place, and 
Sir Francis Burdett having by that time turned too de¬ 
cided a Conservative for many of the Westminster 
electors, a fierce contest was fully expected. The ex¬ 
pected contest came, but chiefly through the extraor¬ 
dinary exertions of Sir George Sinclair—for, as before 
remarked, he had succeeded by this time to the baro¬ 
netcy, by the death of his father,—Sir Francis was 
returned by a majority of 515. As usually happens in 
energetically contested elections, the expenses to either 
candidate are usually at least double, sometimes treble 
the sum mentioned by the agents of the respective can¬ 
didates. A Mr. Croucher, with whom I was personally 
acquainted at that time, a well-known agent either for 
Conservative or Liberal candidates, was the party whom 
the friends of Sir Francis employed to conduct on this 
occasion his election for Westminster. When the election 
was over, there came the usual bill of expenses. But 
what the amount was, I am not certain. It was, how- 





202 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


ever, sufficiently large to disturb tlie equanimity even of 
Sir Francis Burdett, rich and liberal in pecuniary 
matters though he had the reputation of being. But 
ten years afterwards, namely, in 1847, a friend of mine 
contested the representation of Westminster, and lie told 
me himself, that the expenses were close on £12,000 ; and 
to make matters worse, he lost his election by a majority 
of twelve in favour of the opposing candidate. But 
though Sir Francis had in the early part of his letter 
adverted in indignant terms to the colossal proportions 
of his agent’s bill, he penned the remainder in a genial 
and generous spirit. 

About this time, though I cannot give the exact date. 
Sir George Sinclair was present at a dinner party, about 
which he frequently spoke to me, as being probably un¬ 
paralleled for the high position which all present occupied 
either in society, or the legislature, or literature,—some of 
them in all three. The dinner was given by Sir Francis 
Burdett in his town residence, St. James’s Place, St. 
James’s Street. Those present were the then Duke of Wel¬ 
lington, Lord Hill, Commander-in-Chief of the army, Sir 
Edward Sugden, afterwards Lord St. Leonards, Sir Henry 
Hardinge, afterwards Lord Hardinge, the late Sir Robert 
Peel, Sir George Murray, Sir William Follett, Sir George 
Sinclair, Sir Francis Burdett, the Right Hon. John Wil¬ 
son Croker, and Theodore Hook. So much was Sir George 
struck with the fact that there was not a single guest at 
the table of Sir Francis Burdett on this occasion, that 
was not a person of great eminence,—of course he did 
not include himself in this estimate,—that he inscribed 
the names of them all on one of the documents, which 
he had carefully bound up in a book for presentation. I 


THE WESTMINSTER ELECTION OF 1837. 


203 


cannot help here mentioning, as a sad reflection, that of 
these eleven celebrities only one now survives. That 
one is Lord St. Leonards, then Sir Edward Sugden, now 
in his eighty-eighth year. 

In relation to the high position which Sir George 
.Sinclair at this time occupied among the Conservative 
party, and the signal services he had rendered to that 
party, at this important period of the nation’s history, I 
ought not to forget to mention that Lord Eoden, at that 
time the head of the Protestant Conservative party among 
the Peers, wrote a letter in the name of that party, as¬ 
cribing Sir Francis Burdett’s triumph to the energy, the 
ability, and the great intelligence mingled with judgment, 
which Sir George Sinclair displayed on the occasion. 

The greatness of the triumph at the election contest 
in Westminster in 1837, chiefly accomplished through 
the tactics and energy of Sir George Sinclair, may be 
inferred from the great fears which Sir Francis had of 
the result,—fears which, if left to himself, would have 
deterred him from entering the electioneering arena. In 
a letter to Sir George Sinclair, in relation to the impend¬ 
ing contest, consequent on the daily and universally 
expected death of William the Fourth, he expresses him¬ 
self in very unmistakable terms to this effect. He 
placed himself in the hands of Sir George Sinclair and 
some other friends, and evidently thinking that the 
opposition got up against him in consequence of the 
change of his views from Ultra-Eadicalism to Conser- 
vatism, might lead them to dissuade him from again 
contesting the representation of Westminster, he wrote 
a letter to Sir George on the subject, in which occurs 
the following passage, written in terms which would 


204 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


almost imply that he was indifferent as to whether or 
not he should be ag^ain returned to Parliament. “ I, of 
course,” he says, “ must have great consideration for the 
interest and feelings of Lady Burdett and my daughters, 
who are naturally very anxious to enjoy, and to see 
me enjoy some part of my life in peace and tranquillity, 

*—at least, not in perpetual strife and hot water; and I 
almost owe it to them, to consecrate what remains to 
me of life to them.” 

Sir Francis was often very playful in his correspond¬ 
ence with Sir George, and was frequently exceedingly 
felicitous in his epigrammatic quotations from our more 
popular authors. Not less so was he in his speeches in 
Parliament and at public meetings. The illustrations 
which he gave, too, of the ideas which he meant to 
impress on those who heard him, were much admired for 
their point. On one occasion, in speaking of the way in 
which the country was torn to pieces by two great con¬ 
tending factions, he said he could compare the country to 
nothing so appropriately as the great Scriptural fact of 
Christ being crucified between two thieves,—the Tories 
and the Whigs. With reference to those of the electors 
of Westminster who, ceasing to regard him, as they had 
so long done, as “ Westminsters glory,” now treated 
him with the greatest disrespect,—he said they were 
a swarm of pismires, stinging him in all parts of his 
body. The word “ pismires,” being rarely used, was un¬ 
intelligible to the overwhelming majority of those who 
heard it as it fell from Sir Francis’s lips, and consequently 
dictionaries were forthwith put in requisition to ascertain 
the meaning of the word. Pismire is a species of insect 
which stings with all the power of the mosquito. 





SIR FRANCIS BURDETT AND DANIEL O’CONNELL. 


205 


I have said that Sir Francis was felicitous in his refer¬ 


ences and illustrations in his private letters. He rarely, 
indeed, wrote to his more intimate friends without em¬ 
ploying some racy illustrations or pointed allusions. His 
letters to Sir George Sinclair abound with them. In 
a letter written in 1835, he alludes to a letter of Mr. 
Daniel O’Connell, at that time at the summit of his 
power and the height of his glory; for he had then what 
was commonly called “ a tail” of about thirty Irish 
members, ready, at a moment’s notice, to vote on any 
question in any way that he might wish them. They 
were the veriest slaves to the Liberator of Ireland,— 
the name by which O’Connell was then usually called. 
I have not the means of absolutely verifying the fact, 
because Sir Francis simply speaks of “ O’Connell’s letter,” 
but I have no doubt it was in the celebrated letter 
written in relation to the Kepeal of the Union, in which 
he applied to the Melbourne Administration the phrase, 
the “base, brutal, and bloody Whigs,” that Sir Francis Bur- 
dett said, in writing to Sir George Sinclair—“ O’Connell’s 
letter will annoy Ministers not a little. I suppose his 
inconsistent turning and manoeuvring does not please on 
the other side of the water, and the ‘ rent’ ”—the weekly 
fund in aid of the Kepeal Movement—“comes slowly and 
reluctantly in. It wanted a fillip to be given with a 
forty-horse power. I envy you listening to the roaring 
of the sea, contemplating ocean’s bosom, and reposing in 
that of your family, rather than to the impudent bluster¬ 
ing of Dan, the piano of Lord John, or the worse than 
the drone of the bagpipe Hume.” 

I know not whether Sir George ever showed this letter 
to Mr. Hume, but I am sure that if he did no one would 





20G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

have more enjoyed the reference to himself in the end 
of it, than the good-natured Mr. Hume. 

The next letter from Sir Francis Burdett to Sir George 
Sinclair which I find in the extensive collection before 
me refers chiefly, in playful terms, to a present of grouse 
which Sir George had sent to him. It is dated “ Fre- 
mark, September 17, 1838,” and is as follows :— 

Dear Sinclair, 

I delayed in answering your last, first on account of Penn’s 
having written, to give time for digestion ; next, in expectation 
of the grouse arriving, and that I might be able to tell you how 
good they were ; and, also, that we were determined to treat 
ourselves to all you recommended,—soups, broiled grouse, pies, 
&c., &c.—the description of which had excited such an appetite, 
that, like TEsop’s foxes attending their dying sire’s confession, 
representing the dreadful spectre which haunted him of turkeys, 
geese, and the hungry foxes round them. As regards the 
promised treat, so Penn and all exclaim to you :— 

“ Where, sir, is all this dainty cheer ? 

No grouse nor ptannig-an is here. 

These are the phantoms of your brain, 

And your friends lick their lips in vain.” 

However, in consideration of your impatience, I will wait no 
longer their arrival, but say, as Charles the Second is reported 
to have done in answer to an offering from Parliament, which 
he considered as no benefit, and therefore declined accepting it: 
“ Charles the King having no need, thanks you as much as if he 
had !” We all thank you as much as if the grouse had arrived 
safe and sound ,* and as soon as they do, all the culinary experi¬ 
ments pointed out will be diligently made, and, no doubt, suc¬ 
cessfully. 

Yours sincerelv, 

F. Burdett. 


The subject of these Memoirs, both as Mr. and Sir 
George Sinclair, was generally in ill-health. That was. 


SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S HEALTH. 


207 


indeed, his normal condition. I find in all the letters of 
his friends to him that great concern was felt by them at 
the indisposition to which he was so often subject. And 
assuredly if the sympathy of sincere friends, mostly 
eminent for their intellectual acquirements or their 
exalted position in society, could have reconciled the 
invalid to the sickness in various forms from which he 
suffered, it must have been so in his case. There was 
a cordiality in their expressions of concern, when refer¬ 
ring to his illness, which could not fail to be appreciated 
by his generous and grateful nature. And I could speak 
from Sir George’s repeated conversations with myself on 
the subject, that never did human heart more warmly ap¬ 
preciate the assurance of the sympathies of sincere friends 
than did that of the noble character of whose feelings, 
and character, and conduct I am endeavouring to convey 
some idea to my readers. The least kindness, indeed, 
shown to him in any form filled his bosom to overflowing 
with gratitude to him from whose hands it was received. 

But while Sir George Sinclair was loaded with assur¬ 
ances of the sincere sympathy of a host of distinguished 
friends in his seasons of sickness, Sir Francis Burdett, 
above all others, gave a practical turn to his sympathy. 
Sir Francis had himself been the subject of much bodily 
suffering, chiefly arising from frequent and fierce attacks 
of the gout, and though the illness of Sir George had no 
connection with the gout, yet, believing that the system 
of treatment from which he derived the greatest advan¬ 
tage would be most beneficial to Sir George, he urged on 
the latter, with an earnestness which I have never seen 
surpassed, the importance of a resort to the homoeopathic 
mode of treatment. Homoeopathy never, indeed, had 


20 $ 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


a more zealous supporter than it had in his person. 
If the truth of the system bore any proportion to 
the admiration and advocacy of it in the case of Sir 
Francis Burdett, no human being ought ever to have 
perished in the hands of a homoeopathic doctor. I doubt, 
indeed, whether any disciple of Hahnemann, however 
able as a writer he might be, could have been more 
eloquent and eulogistic in its praises than was Sir Francis 
Burdett. In answer to a letter from Sir George, in which 
the latter had made some allusions to the ill-health from 
which he was suffering, Sir Francis, writing from “ Clum¬ 
ber Court, November, 1840,” says: “Dear Sinclair,— 
Your affecting letter this morning puts me painfully in 
mind of Bosville’s humorous observation, that misfortunes 
never come alone, which, though a witty bull, expresses 
a melancholy truth ; and I have lost a brother with whom 
I never had an angry word, or a moment’s interruption 
to the warmest affection, from his cradle to his grave. I 
lately, too, met with an awful accident myself, which has 
confined me to my room—almost to my bed—till within 
these last few days, now for more than a month, and I 
can now only crawl across my room on crutches. Then 
your note this morning adds to this heavy load. Do let 
me persuade you to try that from which I have received 
so much benefit,—the homoeopathic system. It seems 
to me especially calculated to give you great relief. Its 
modus operandi is, through the veins, upon the whole 
system, by the strength and vigour which it imparts. 
The stomach is not deranged by strong nauseous medicines, 
or the bowels disturbed by them. The effect of it is, that 
the whole of the functions of life are invigorated, while 
no particular organ is particularly affected. Last of all, 



SIR FRANCIS BURDETT AND THE REPORTERS. 


209 


though it seems at first sight strange that so much good 
can be done without a chance of any mischief, yet such 
is the fact. Homoeopathy is, indeed, the only rational 
mode of treating a case of nervous debility. Would to 
Heaven you were in St. James’s Place ” [Sir Francis 
Burdett’s London residence] “ instead of Thurso Castle. 
Don’t go to Edinburgh for the aid of the learned of the 
old school—‘ contraria contrariis curantur’—but come to 
the dictate of Nature, ‘ similia similibus.’ Give homoeo¬ 
pathy a trial at any rate. The opposite you have tried 
long enough. Very sincerely yours, F. Burdett.” 

Sir Francis, in others of his letters to Sir George, 
denounces the allopathic doctors, and their mode of 
treating their patients, in unmeasured terms, and again 
and again beseeches him to have recourse to physicians 
who practised the homoeopathic system; but Sir George 
had no faith in the latter system, and never put himself 
under the care of a homoeopathic doctor. Sir Francis 
himself appears to have ultimately lost all confidence in 
homoeopathy, for we find him putting himself into the 
hands of one who kept a large hydropathic establishment. 
In relation to this latter mode of medical treatment, I will 
only say that whatever it may have proved, or may prove, 
to others, it had no beneficial effects on him. He unfor¬ 
tunately died while under that mode of treatment. In 
saying this, let me be understood as simply stating a fact, 
and not as insinuating that he died because of his being a 
hydropathic patient. 

Sir Francis Burdett seems to have been, on some 
occasions, very awkwardly misunderstood, and conse¬ 
quently misreported by “ the gentlemen of the press,” to 
whom he repeatedly refers in his letters to Sir George 



210 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Sinclair. He had made a speech at a great Conservative 
banquet which took place at Dover in 1839, and of the 
way in which his speech is reported he thus writes to Sir 
George :—“ Well,” he says, “ the newspapers make strange 
reports of my sayings and doings. In their account of 
my sayings at Dover, they put all I say about the 
influence of our women to the account of the judges; 
and the allusion to poor Lady Flora Hastings is placed 
to the account of the old ladies in ermine at Westminster 
Hall. One of the reporters has enclosed me his account 
of my speech, requesting me to correct it, in order to a 
separate publication of the transactions of the day. I 
have returned an answer that it is out of my power, and 
that I must return it as the Paris barber did Sterne's wig 
when he was desired to put it in shape and order—that 
it was beyond his art—he could not undertake to touch 
it—that it would be far easier and cheaper to make a 
new one.” Sir Francis adds, in relation to the extra¬ 
ordinary blunders which the reporters had affiliated on 
him, that he “ could not help laughing, in spite of pain, 
springing from a severe attack of gout, for a good ten 
minutes sans intermission.” 

Sir George, I find from various letters to him, written 
not only by Sir Francis Burdett but by other friends, 
had been very uneasy about something which is not 
mentioned. Nor can I learn from the family papers 
which have been committed to my care what particular 
thing had been thus brooding in Sir George's mind. 
Neither on inquiring of the nearest and dearest members 
of his family have I been able to ascertain what it was 
that thus pressed upon him. All that is plain to me is, 
that there was something soon after he left parliament 



LETTER FROM SIR F. BURDETT TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 211 

which his exquisitely sensitive mind suggested to him he 
ought to have done, but which lie had left undone. But 
from one of his numerous letters to Sir Francis Burdett 
it would seem that some persons—they were no doubt 
very few—had also reproached him for not having done 
this very something. In a letter dated, “ January 5th, 
1842,” written by Sir Francis to Sir George, in answer 
to a letter of the latter, he thus writes :— 

“ Bear Sinclair,—I was relieved from suspense and 
anxiety by your letter. I thought you had been at 
Edinburgh, and was looking daily for a line. Why do 
you torment yourself? or rather, why do you not rejoice, 
and thank God that the accusation is a vile calumny ? 
Surely you have reason to be happy. You have all the 
ingredients. £ Parva rum , ct spiritum Graice tenuem 
Carhcence.’ And surely you are man enough, ‘ Malignum 
sjjernere vulcjus! 

“ Bouse yourself; meet malice and disappoint it by 
defiance, and showing you are above its powers; and 
sustain those you love, and by whom you are loved, by 
your example, and by your confidence in them and in 
yourself. Complain not that you are a man, and subject 
to all the influences which hourly afflict this mortal body 
which we inhabit. Show that you are not unable to bear 
up against the still more potent missiles of hatred and 
malice. Were it not for these and such like trials, 
where would he the proof of virtue ? of men’s value 
and their works ? No vice, no virtue—no evil, no good 
—no pain, no pleasure. Yet shallow men complain that 
there should be vice, evil, and pain, and inconsistently 
maintain that this is a life of trial, to be hereafter re¬ 
warded. Yours sincerely, F. Burdett.” 



212 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

I have said that this correspondence between Sir 
George Sinclair and Sir Francis Burdett took place soon 
after the retirement of the former from parliamentary 
life. My belief is, that whatever it was that wounded his 
exceedingly susceptible mind, it must have been some- 
thing which struck him after lie ceased to be a member of 
the Legislature, for just before then I spent a long evening 
with him in the family of mutual friends, where there 
were no strangers present, and where, consequently, had 
anything been pressing on his mind, there w T as all the 
greater probability of his unbosoming himself to us. But 
he made no allusion to anything as weighing on his 
mind at the time. I could, I fancied, discover some¬ 
thing like a modified regret, that he was about to retire 
from legislative life, which was to him, in a sense, with¬ 
drawing from public life ; but that w T as a natural feeling, 
especially as his parliamentary career had been charac¬ 
terised by great success, and had much to do with the 
distinguished local position which he had so long occu¬ 
pied. But during the whole of the time he spent on 
that occasion in the house of his and my mutual friends, 
no word escaped Sir George which would have given 
countenance to the idea which pervades several of the 
letters of Sir Francis Burdett, and other friends of his 
at this particular period. I remember (as vividly as if 
the words had been spoken only an hour ago, though 
more than a quarter of a century has since passed away) 
his saying to me, that he meant chiefly to spend the re¬ 
mainder of his days in Thurso Castle, in contemplating 
the works and ways of God. 

The intimate friendship which subsisted between Sir 
George Sinclair and Sir Francis Burdett for more than a 


MR. JOHN WILSON CHOKER. 


213 


quarter of a century before this time, was maintained until 
the death of the latter in 1844. And Miss Burdett Coutts 
continued ever afterwards to feel the same regard for Sir 
George which her father had, through this prolonged 
period, uniformly cherished. Some years afterwards, 
Miss Burdett Coutts paid a visit to Sir George and his 
family. So warm was her reception at the Castle, and so 
cordial the welcome which she received from the Caith¬ 
ness Highlanders, that she prolonged her visit for five 
weeks. So delighted, indeed, was Miss Burdett Coutts 
with the people and the highland scenery of that most 
northern of all our Highland counties, that at one time 
she had fully made up her mind to purchase sufficient 
land on which to erect a Highland Home, though circum¬ 
stances afterwards occurred to prevent her carrying her 
purpose into effect. 

The next friend of Mr. Sinclair, whose name may 
appropriately follow the name of Sir Francis Burdett, is 
Mr. John Wilson Crokcr, for many years a member of 
the House of Commons. He was the friend equally of 
Mr. Sinclair and of Sir Francis. In the literary world, 
few persons were better known for a full quarter of a 
century than Mr. John Wilson Croker. But his literary 
reputation did not rest on any works of importance, or 
which had achieved popularity, for he had published 
only two or three detached works, neither of which 
obtained either for itself or for its author any celebrity. 
He edited a new edition of “ Boswells Life of Johnson,” 
to which the tomahawk of Lord Macaulay was applied in 
the “ Edinburgh Review,” with the same merciless rigour 
as he had so often done in dealing with the works of 
others. Mr. Croker was also the editor of “ The Suffolk 


214 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Papers.” “Walpoles Letters to Lord Hertford” were 
also published under his editorial auspices ; but neither 
of these last named books excited much interest. The 
• only work of which he might be said to be the 
author, and which attracted even a moderate share of 
attention, was his “Easy Stories from the History of 
England.” It was as a well-known writer in the 

“ Quarterly Beview,” that Mr. Croker attained his emi¬ 
nent position in the literary world. So intimate and 
well-known was Mr. Chokers connection with the 
“ Quarterly ” leviathan, that there was not for more 
than twenty years a single person possessing any lite¬ 
rary knowledge worthy the name, who was ignorant 
of the fact of his being the chief party connected with 
it. Many, indeed, believed—and no amount of evi¬ 
dence to the contrary would satisfy them it was not 
so—that he was the real editor of that periodical. But 
this was a mistake. He never was editor of the “ Quar¬ 
terly,”'—not even for a single number. The first editor 
was Dr. Gifford, who raised himself to that distinction 
from the very humble occupation of a mender of boots 
and shoes. This Dr. Gifford, though entirely self-taught, 
acquired a large amount of general information, with a 
marvellous knowledge of languages. He was what is 
called a “ slashing writer,” and by the severity of his 
criticisms, mingled with the varied knowledge he dis¬ 
played, soon drew attention to the “ Quarterly Beview ” 
in its earlier history. 

Mr. Coleridge, lately Mr. Justice Coleridge,—author of 
the recent “ Life of the Bev. Mr. Keble,” and father of the 
present Attorney-General,—succeeded Dr. Gifford in the 
editorship of the “ Quarterly;” but he did not remain long 





215 


EDITORS OF THE “QUARTERLY REVIEW.” 


in that position. In fact, lie seriously compromised his 
own literary reputation, and in some measure diminished 
the prestige of that journal, by an article of his own, in 
the first number which appeared under his editorial 
auspices. To show the importance which he attached 
to the article, lie gave it the place of honour—that is, 
made it the first article in the number. In adverting to 
Mexico and other countries in the western world, he 
made use of the expression—“ Mexico and the other 
States of South America/’—Mexico happening to be 
among the Northern States of America. 


Mr. Coleridge was succeeded by Mr. (afterwards Sir 
John) Barrow of the Admiralty; but his editorial reign 
was also short, because it was found that, occupying as 
he did so prominent a place as second Secretary to the 
Admiralty, the editorship of the “ Quarterly” was not 
compatible with his official duties. Still he continued to 
be one of its most frequent and most valued contributors. 

Mr. Lockhart, the son-in-law of Sir Walter Scott, was 
Sir John Barrow’s successor in the “Quarterly’s” editorial 
chair, which he occupied for many years, and only va¬ 
cated it when the state of his health unfitted him for 
literary labours of any kind. 

Next came the Bev. Mr. El win, a name that was en¬ 


tirely unknown in literature beyond the circle of his own 
j)ersonal friends. He swayed the editorial sceptre for a 
few years, and was succeeded by Mr. William Mac- 
pherson, for a still briefer period. Then came Dr. William 
Smith, editor of “ Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible.” Dr. 
Smith, who is, or was, a Dissenter, still fills the office of 
editor of the “ Quarterly Beview,” and has lately added to 
his journalistic duties the editorship of Mr. Murray’s new 



216 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


monthly periodical, “ The Academy/' started in the month 
of October last. 

But though Mr. Croker was never the editor of the 
“ Quarterly Review/' he had always, from the time of his 
becoming a contributor, to the time of his death in 1857, 
been the principal writer in it. He was as influential with 
the “ Quarterly " as if he had actually been its recognised 
and responsible editor. He was the writer of nearly all 
its articles on the great public questions of the day. 

It was his own individual opinions on political ques¬ 
tions that he expressed in the pages of that periodical. 
What he personally thought and felt, he wrote ; and 
what he wrote duly appeared clothed with all the high 
authority with which the “ Quarterly" was then invested. 
It does not exercise the same power now as it did in the 
days of Mr. Croker, but it still possesses no inconsider¬ 
able influence in the realms of literature and the region 
of politics. 

Everyone knows, who was cognisant of the particular 
articles which Mr. Croker wrote for the “ Quarterly 
Review," that his criticisms were usually, whether as¬ 
sailing an author or attacking a politician of the opposite 
party to his own, of the most severe—often of the 
most savage kind. Mr. Disraeli, in the earlier part of 
his career as an author, was repeatedly the subject of 
these terrible onslaughts by Mr. Croker. But the time 
came when Mr. Disraeli had his revenge. He may be 
said to have made him the hero of his “ Coningsby "—the 
most successful of Mr. Disraeli’s numerous works of fiction. 
Anything more scathing than Mr. Disraeli’s treatment of 
Mr. Croker, under the name of “ Coningsby/’ has hardly 
been met with in the literature of the present century. 



MR. JOHN WILSON CROKER IN PRIVATE LIFE. 


217 


Mr. Croker was many years in Parliament, and occupied 
a seat for an Irish borough during the time the first 
Reform Bill was under discussion. He made himself 
notable for the zeal with which he defended nomination 
boroughs, and opposed every proposal made to confer the 
elective franchise on large towns. He drew down on 
himself a large amount of ridicule, which stuck to him 
through life, by declaring in the House of Commons, on 
the word Bloomsbury being mentioned, that not only did 
he not know where Bloomsbury was, but that he had 
never before heard of the name. He looked with disdain 
on anybody and everybody that was not aristocratic; 
and the universal belief was that the real reason why he 
repudiated all knowledge of Bloomsbury was, that the 
place was too much of the middle-class character for him 
to acknowledge an acquaintance with it. Though having 
no other title than the conventional one of “ The Right 
Honourable/' and consequently being simply plain “ Mr. 
John Wilson Croker," he worshipped titles, and in his 
excessive devotion in that direction, showing itself in 
aristocratic airs and assumptions, he was held up to 
derision as being more aristocratic than the aristocracy 
themselves. 

And yet in private life Mr. Croker was a very agree¬ 
able man. He had none of the hauteur, or assumption, or 
asperity, which he showed in his speeches in the House of 
Commons, and in his writings in the “ Quarterly Review." 
Out of a goodly number of his letters to Sir George 
Sinclair which the latter has preserved, I do not see one 
displaying these qualities; but, on the contrary, there is 
more or less of geniality and good feeling in them all. 
Some of them, indeed, abound in the latter quality. The 


218 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


very second in the collection which Sir George has pre¬ 
served of Mr. Crokers letters I find to be as follows. It 
is dated— 

West Monlsey, Surrey, 

Jan. 8th, 1834. 

My dear Sir, 

I have let some time elapse before I replied to your letter 
that I might not intrude on your affliction, of which I can ap¬ 
preciate the poignancy, having myself had the irreparable mis¬ 
fortune of losing my only son; and every time that I hear of any 
similar loss, my own wound breaks out again. The tone of your 
letter satisfies me that you look for consolation to the only true 
Source; but, let me add, that I find a degree of comfort in think¬ 
ing that one I loved so well is spared a life of misery, which, I 
think, was likely to have been his lot in such times as I antici¬ 
pate, and with such principles as I hope he would have had. 

Alas ! my dear sir, you talk of the danger of the Church ;—its 
temporal danger is, indeed, imminent, but the danger of religion 
itself is still greater. I doubt whether, in the abstract, religion 
can be maintained amongst mankind without the aid of an 
Establishment, which not only supports the piety of its 
own members, hut even instigates the zeal of Dissenters by 
example, by rivalry, by a spirit of opposition. This may look 
like paradox; but the human heart is so liable to be affected by 
perverse and mundane motives, that I very much fear that, 
without the stimulus of something like a party spirit, the great 
mass of mankind could hardly he excited to thoughts purely 
spiritual. If every man were at full liberty,—if all sects were 
equally favoured,—if there was no public opinon leaning towards 
one form of observance in preference to another,—if the laws did 
not remind us of our duties,—in short, if religion were to be left, 
to use the liberal phrase, a private question between each 
individual and his Maker, the bulk of mankind would first neg¬ 
lect the observances, would next disregard the essence, and 
would finally become indifferent to all practical religion, subsid¬ 
ing, probably, the better, into a theoretic deism, the more de¬ 
praved, into active atheism. To that fearful consummation, I 
tremble to think, we are advancing; and the 2'>olitical principles 
of the day portend but too surely the repeal of all restraints on 


POLITICAL CORRESPONDENCE WITH MR. J. W. CROKER. 210 


individual liberty of conscience,—even of those moral restraints, 
—restraints which particular creeds and church establishments 
inculcate. Rather than improve, your reform bill has destroyed 
prescription, discipline, and authority, the great bonds of 
society; for prescription, as 1 said in one of my speeches, is to 
the moral world what gravity is to the natural world ; it keeps 
everything in its place: society will become a fortuitous con¬ 
course of atoms, and the religious world will be “ without form 
and void, and darkness will be upon the face ” of the earth. 

I have no more spirits to enter on other topics than you could 
have to read them; and I therefore conclude with offering you 
my best wishes that your personal happiness may be greater in 
the coming year than in that which closed so darkly on you. 
When you come to town I shall hope to see you for a little 
space. We may promise ourselves our old habits and inter¬ 
course. 

Yours very sincerely, 

J. W. Croker. 

In this letter there is not only the expression of the 
grief which he naturally felt at the loss of his own son, 
but deep sympathy with Sir George Sinclair in the sea 
of sorrow into which the latter had lately been plunged. 
And yet, mingled with Mr. Croker s touching allusions 
to his own and his friends bereavements, there are allu¬ 
sions to political and ecclesiastical topics which will be 
read with interest at the present day. 

I pass over several intervening letters written by Mr. 
Croker to Sir George Sinclair, because they chiefly relate 
to matters which show the mutual friendship which sub¬ 
sisted between the two. The next letter which I shall 
give is labelled by Sir George, “ Political Correspondence 
with Mr. J. W. Croker.” Though short, there are various 
things in it which must awaken reflections in every con¬ 
templative mind. But before alluding to these, let me 
give the letter itself. It is dated— 



220 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


My dear Sinclair, 


West Moulsey, Surrey, 

September 2Cth, 1837. 


Your letter of the 13th followed me to Drayton Manor and 
Wimpole, and finally reached Moulsey two days ago. I have 
little return to make in this dull season, but you will be glad to 
hear that I left Peel (after spending ten days with him) as well 
as ever I saw him in my life, notwithstanding the fears of the 
Ministerial papers about his health. He shot every day, and 
out-shot, and out-walked us all,—though some of us were not 
inactive followers of the sport. He had Sir James Graham 
there, whom I was glad to meet, and we talked over the Reform 
Bill as our ghosts would have done in the Elysian Fields. 

I was very much pleased with Sir Francis’s triumph in—not 
Dorsetshire, as your pen says—but Wiltshire, and just as much 
at the splendid dinner given in honour of that event. I hope 
he will have strength to take an active part on his legs in the 
cause which he has served so well by his contests for the seats 
in Wiltshire and Westminster. 

We hear little of what is going on in Windsor, but that Lord 
Melbourne is constant in his attendance, and well accepted 
there. I have no doubt that Louis Philippe and Leopold look 
on him as a juste milieu man like their own ministers, and 
advise his retention ; and so, if the Queen were to consult me, 
should I. Two or three more attempts at new Ministries will 
accomplish the revolution, and I think our best chance is to 
leave Lord Melbourne with a majority of five,—enough, with 
Peel’s help, to do the business of the country, and not enough 
to bully the House of Lords. 

I know not what you may be, in lat. 58° 30', but I know that 
we are shivering with cold seven degrees nearer the sun. I 
would not be surprised to hear that you are snowed up. 

Yours most sincerely, 


J. W. Croker. 


This letter gives some insight into the state of 
political parties at the time it was written. Two years 
before the ministry of Sir Robert Peel had been driven 
from office by the success of Lord John Riissells motion 


LETTER OF MR. CROIvER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 


221 


in favour of what was called the Appropriation Principle, 
in relation to the Irish Church; but the Administration 
of Lord Melbourne, which succeeded that of Sir Robert 
Peel, had in the short space of two years become so 
feeble, that its majority was reduced to five. The Tories, 
however, thought it better—for the reasons made known 
in this letter of Mr. Croker—to let them remain on 
sufferance a little longer in office. 

But though this letter of Mr. Croker to Sir George Sin¬ 
clair is politically interesting, few, I feel assured, who have 
reached the meridian of life, and consequently were con¬ 
versant with the sayings and doings of the time at which 
it was written, can help a feeling of sadness coming over 
their minds, as they glance their eye over its contents. 
Strange to say, not only have the writer and he to whom 
the letter was addressed passed away from this earthly 
scene, but all the others whose names are mentioned in 
it, with the single exception of our Queen, have also gone 
to “ that bourne from whence no traveller returns.” 
Louis Philippe, King Leopold, Lord Melbourne, Sir 
Robert Peel, Sir Francis Burdett, Sir James Graham, 
have, with Mr. Croker and Sir George Sinclair, all gone 
to the house appointed for all living,—so that out of nine 
persons whose names are mentioned in a letter written 
in 1837, only one, and that one her Majesty, is to be 
found in the land of the living in 1869. 

The following letter is dated “West Moulsey, Feb. 1, 
1838.” It is one of the most pungent of the collection 
which Sir George has preserved of Mr. Croker’s corre¬ 
spondence with him. The Mr. Mackenzie alluded to in 
several parts of the letter, was the Mackenzie who was 
the chief leader in the Canadian rebellion, which caused so 





222 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


much trouble to the Whig Government of that day. Sir 
Francis Head was at that time the Governor-General of 
Canada, and was deemed quite unfit for the crisis,—a fact 
which will explain the point of Mr. Crokers remark—“ I 
fear Sir Francis Head is no head at all.” 


West Moulsey, Surrey, 

February 1st, 1838. 


My dear Sinclair, 

The sooner the better; and I, therefore, shall wait on Sir 
Francis Burdett on Monday next, at seven, that is, if a cold 
which I have had for this fortnight, and which is going, should 
he gone. 

You did not say a word too much about the ministers on 
Monday. You will, perhaps, see somewhere evidence of my 
agreeing with you in some of the topics you mentioned. The 
plain truth is this, that the new constitution does, practically, 
not afford the means of governing the country, and that ministers 
(not the Whigs merely, but any ministers) are like men swim¬ 
ming for their lives, and their course is compounded of two 
motions —one the current, and the other the desire of reaching 
the nearest point, without considering whether it is the easiest 
or the safest,—and they will reach nothing. 

As to “ talk so much/' do you recollect that I took the liberty 
of expressing to you my doubt as to the expediency of Sir Francis 
giving that notice, at least till he should have consulted Goul- 
burn and Hardinge; for I had heard enough to make me suspect 
that if there was crime on one side, there was fault on the other ? 
But that notice having been given, I do not like a retreat. Sir 
Francis is too important and too remarkable a person to make 
any movement that will not be observed upon. I fear, too, 
though you do not state it, that the Government adjourned over 
Sir Francis’s notice day. That, perhaps, might relieve him from 
the necessity of making a formal notice; but I hardly knowhow 
it can excuse an entire abandonment. However, recollect that 
when O'Connell sees you wavering, he will change , and probably 
force on the inquiry, when he sees you are afraid of it. This I 
say myself, on the view of Sir Francis’s personal position; for I 




LETTER OF MR. CROKER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 223 

really have quite forgotten what little I ever knew of the details 
of the case. 

I have not seen Follett [Sir William Follett] this fortnight, 
hut I shall dress at his house on Monday, and hear what he says. 

I fear Sir Francis Head is no head at all; was there ever such 
miserable captandum stuff as his letter ? The manifest folly,— 
if it were not a manifest lie,—of standing with his arms folded 
because his enemy was going to make a blow at him, and, in order 
to enable him to do it the more effectively, is worthy of Baron 
Munchausen ; and purposely sending the troops away that Mr. 
Mackenzie might be at full liberty to rebel, is worse than Dog¬ 
berry’s allowing the thief to steal himself away,—which Mackenzie 
did. In short, the man was caught in a trap laid by his own 
presumption, and is now endeavouring to lie himself out of it. 

Yours faithfully, 

J. W. Croker. 

The next letter of Mr. Croker to Sir George Sinclair, 
which I shall give, has no date. But as I find among 
the papers of Sir George a reply to this letter dated 
“ August 30th, 1840,” there can be little doubt that the 
speech of Sir George to which this letter is an answer, 
was published in the pamphlet form in that same year. 
The speech of Sir George was based on the principles 
and feelings of humanity, whereas Mr. Croker deals with 
it on the basis of a cold political economy. But let the 
letter of Mr. Croker speak for itself. It is as follows :— 

My Dear Sinclair, 

I have been a fortnight exactly in France, and on my return 
to-day find your letter and speech, and hasten to acknowledge 
them, as well as to account for my not having written to you 
lately, as I had promised. Your speech is very clever, and, I 
know, most honestly and sincerely meant; but I cannot concur 
in the principle on which it is founded. It is the first law of 
nature, the primal curse of an angry, but all-wise Creator, that 
we should earn our bread in toil and pain, and by the sweat of 
our brow; and though a few, by industry, and luck, and God’s 



224 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


good providence, are enabled to raise themselves and their suc¬ 
cessors above the necessity of actual work, the great mass of 
mankind are , and must be, stimulated by want to the labour by 
which the world exists. It is meet and right, and our bounden 
duty, to help the weak, and to alleviate distress, as far as our 
means allow ; but to tell the working classes that any power can 
relieve them from their state of want and dependence is to im¬ 
pugn, as it seems to me, the dispensations of Providence, and to 
disorder the frame of society. There never was a country, and 
there never was a time, in which so much has been done, and so 
much is doing, for the poor,—so much attention to their instruc¬ 
tion, their health, their comforts, their morals, their religion,— 
and yet, because we cannot destroy the great balance of nature* 
held by the hand of God,—because we cannot make poor rich, 
low high, round square, you accuse all the upper classes of want 
of due sympathy with their poorer neighbours. What, my dear 
friend, would you have us do ? You shall be our Lycurgus. 
How shall we act to fulfil your benevolent intentions ? 

I have a couple of thousands a-year. I am, therefore, a rich 
man. I spend all that income,—little on myself, no more than 
is necessary in eating and drinking, some in charity, and all the 
rest in giving work and employment to the various classes of 
persons who come in contact with me. My wife goes every day 
of her life, for two or three hours, into the village. She visits 
the sick daily, the afflicted frequently, the needy as much as she 
can. I help her, b}^ encouraging and enabling her, according to 
my means, to do all this. But what can we do more ? You,— 
kind, benevolent, and clever as you are,— what more can we do ? 
I will not say how easy it is to talk of alleviating the sufferings 
of the poor ; but I ask you again, what would you do? You 
say, “ The poor want bread, as well as Bibles.” I go a step 
further,—“ They want bread before Bibles.” But how can the 
rich give them bread ? Only by giving work. Count D’Orsay, 
who orders two superfluous carriages and ten superfluous coats, 
does more towards giving bread to the poor than the most 
philanthropic speech ever made in Parliament. 

“ Hence tlie poor are clothed, the hungry fed, 

Health to himself, and to his children bread ; 

Thus labour brings what the hard heart denies, 

And ostentatious vanity supplies.” 


LETTER FROM MR. CHOKER TO SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR. 225 

^ ou talk of the “ appalling debt,” as one of the causes of the 
distress of the poor. In what countries in the world are the 
poor best off ? In countries where you have a public debt , 
which is the reservoir of the produce of former industry ap¬ 
plicable to the creation of new industry—England, Holland, 
Modern France. Where are the poor poorest ? Where there is 
no debt,—that is, no capital, no credit,—Spain, Poland, Italy, and 
all the uncivilised world. 

In short, my dear Sinclair, when you say that I am the only 
one of your friends that you think may approve your speech, 
you mistake the state of the case; there is none who can possibly 
differ more widely from you. I admire its talent ; I am touched 
by its good feeling; but I doubt its facts, deny its reasonings, 
and regret its tendencies, and, above all, that part which implies 
that the Government,—or no Government,—the House of Com¬ 
mons, can remedy evils which are the inevitable portion and 
penalty of human nature. 

Forgive the length of my letter, and the freedom of my criti¬ 
cisms ; but I could not, in honesty, tell you that I approved your 
speech, nor that I disapproved it, without giving you a few of my 
reasons. 

We live in such a complicated world, that there is no theory 
which may not find support in parts of our system. I have done 
with theories, and theoretical benevolence and philanthropy are 
as deceptive as the rest. I want facts. What is to be done ? 
All beyond is mischief and misery to the poor and the rich. 

Good-bye. I have ventured on all this because I think it due 
to you, in kindness, to let you know my opinion, and I send it 
to you at once, while the feeling that your speech excites is 
fresh. 

I am here, with two of my families, by the sea-side, and shall 
be back at Moulsey for a month. 

Yours faithfully, 

J. W. Croker. 

The last letter of Mr. Croker to Sir George Sinclair 
to which I shall advert is elated “ January 11th, 1852.” 
He was at this time so very ill, that his recovery was 
considered doubtful, both by himself and others. He 

Q 


220 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

describes at considerable length, and with great precision, 
the nature and actings of the serious illness under which 
he then laboured, but it is not necessary to give that 
part of his letter. My main purpose in alluding to this 
letter is, because of the opportunity it affords me to 
record the fact of his entire submission to the Divine 
will, blended with the expression of the kindest feelings 
towards Sir George, at a time when he thought himself 
in all probability on the verge of another world. That 
such was his impression, is evident, from the very first 
words in the letter now lying before me. ee My dear 
Sinclair,” he says, “ it is but too true, that I am, I believe, 
in a very precarious state.” After describing the nature 
of his illness, he says 1 “ This is my present state—the 
lowness of the pulse and the gloomy prospects it causes, 
make me somewhat languid and out of spirits as to my 
condition; but in other respects the doctors are aston¬ 
ished, that one should be at once so well and so ill. 
The result is* in the hands of God, and probably not 
distant. I wait His pleasure, not merely with resignation, 
but with gratitude, that in my seventy-second year I have 
neither bodily suffering nor mental decay, and that I am 
fondly and carefully watched over and supported by a circle 
of wife, children, and friends, as anxious and affectionate 
as ever man was blest with. Adieu, my dear Sinclair, 
receive my best wishes, and if we are not to meet again, 
continue your kindness to my memory.” 

There is something very touching, as well as pious, 
in this. Mr. Croker recovered partially from this illness, 
but never was quite himself again. This was in 1852. 
In 1857, five years afterwards, he died. As he was a 
man whose name was so much and so Ions: before the 

O 



LETTER FROM LADY BARROW TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 227 

public, both as a legislator and as a literary man, I feel 
assured that the letter of his daughter, Lady Barrow, to 
Sir George Sinclair, giving an account of his last illness, 
terminating in death, will be read with much interest, 
more especially as the incidents described by Lady Barrow 
have not before been made public. The following is the 
letter :— 

Kensington Palace, 

August 2Gth, 1857. 

My Bear Sir George, 

It is my dear mother’s special wish that I should answer your 
most kind letter immediately for her, to tell you how grateful 
she feels for your true, genuine sympathy, which, she knows, 
comes from your heart. Well knowing the mutual friendship 
and true regard which existed between you and my dearest 
father, she always knew how really you appreciated his worth 
and talents, and truly has your letter shown it. It pleased our 
Heavenly Father, in His mercy, to take him precisely in the way 
he had always wished to go, in one moment, without a struggle, 
or even a pang. He had been dictating to within an hour, and 
had wished us all good-night, in the most affectionate manner, 
about seven minutes before it took place. His mind and intel¬ 
lect were the same as ever up to the last moment ; even his wit 
and pleasantry at times came out. Only a few days before he had 
asked my mother for the trash-basket, in order to throw into it 
some waste pieces of paper, and, by mistake, she brought him 
the basket containing his papers on Pope, when he said, “ Why, 
that is the basket containing all my wit and genius ! do you call 
that the trash -basket ? ” It is one of our greatest comforts to 
know that his faith and hope were surely fixed on the true 
foundation of our Blessed Christian Faith, and the fruits were 
indeed apparent,—the submission to God's will with which he 
bore acute and lengthened sufferings. No one ever heard one 
murmuring word from him, from first to last, and latterly his 
pain had been very severe, it was supposed, from internal neur¬ 
algia. Two sentences which he uttered in his illness I wrote 
down at the moment, so as not to forget them. One was : 

“ Health, like salvation, was entirely from the grace of God; 


228 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


and yet we must put forth our own efforts.” The other was : 
“ The entire depravity of man and the eterpal justice of God 
could never have been reconciled without a Mediator; a Re¬ 
deemer was, therefore, of necessity.” 

With dear Mamma’s and my kindest regards to you, 

Believe me, my dear Sir George, 

Yours most sincerely, 

Rosamond N. Barrow. 

This is a beautiful letter ; and by a man like Sir George 
Sinclair, to whom it was addressed, it must have been 
received and read with the deepest interest. To him it 
must have been especially gratifying to find that at a 
time when so many of our men of high literary position 
practically ignored the great truths of the Gospel, this 
intimate friend of many years’ standing, was, in the im¬ 
mediate prospect of a dying hour, resting on a rock; for 
any one who could say in all sincerity, as he said, that 
“ the entire depravity of man, and the eternal justice of 
God, could never have been reconciled without a Me¬ 
diator, and that a Redeemer was, therefore, of necessity,” 
—had got a clear perception and firm hold of the great 
central truth of the Gospel. He was resting his hopes 
of a happy hereafter on a rock as stable as the foun¬ 
dations of God s throne in the heavens. 

Mr. Croker thus died in peace, in the seventy-seventh 
year of his age. 



CHAPTER X. 


The year 1830—Sir George Sinclair’s Friendship for Charles the Tenth of 
France—His Sympathy with the Royal Exile—Letter to the Count de 
Chambord, or Due de Bordeaux, on the State of Affairs in France—His 
Interview with Charles the Tenth—The deep Interest Sir George took in 
the Misfortunes of the Royal Exile—General Observations. 

I now come to an important epoch in European history, 
but especially in that of France, in which Sir George 
Sinclair took a very special interest. The period to which 
I allude is the French Eevolution of 1830, when Charles 
the Tenth was expelled from the throne of France, and 
Louis Philippe chosen, under the designation of the 
“ Citizen King/’ in his stead. Sir George Sinclair, 
though, as has been abundantly shown in my previous 
pages, a Liberal in his political views, yet believing that 
the former was the rightful sovereign of France, felt a 
profound sympathy for him when dethroned and com- 
pelled to seek an asylum in a foreign land. No small 
measure of that sympathy had doubtless its origin in the 
personal intimacy which existed in early life between him 
and Charles the Tenth. In a letter addressed some years 
ago by Sir George to the present Count de Chambord, 
grandson of that monarch, and claimant to the throne of 
France, under the title of Henry the Fifth, which letter 
was confided to me for publication,—he makes pointed 
reference to that intimacy with the royal grandsire of 



2 JO 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


tlie Count. Sir George begins his letter to the latter 
by a distinct recognition of his being the lawful heir to 
the throne of France. In fact, the superscription of the 
letter is, “ To his Majesty King Henry the Fifth.” The 
writer then proceeds thus :— 

Sire, 

It will, of course, be in your Majesty’s recollection that your 
royal grand-uncle, Louis XVIII., resided in this country during 
several years as an exile, whilst his throne was usurped by a 
foreign and ferocious upstart, who sacrificed millions of his fel¬ 
low-creatures throughout Europe at the shrine of his own inor¬ 
dinate and unprincipled ambition. As your august predecessor 
was unfortunate, he was, of course, shunned and slighted by the 
politicians and parasites of that day, and lived almost unnoticed 
by Britons of every degree, in a state of dignified seclusion. No 
sooner, however, had fortune smiled upon him than this general 
apathy and neglect were at once superseded by manifestations of 
universal attachment and applause; and I myself witnessed from 
the windows of a hotel, in April, 1814, the acclamations with 
which he was greeted and gratified on his arrival in London by 
a dense mass of the metropolitan population. Whilst nobles, 
senators, and courtiers vied with each other in their eager de¬ 
monstrations of amity and respect, he became the honoured 
guest of the Prince Regent, to whom he had always been an 
object of courtesy and friendship. Your august grandsire, about 
sixteen years after that period, sought shelter in this land from 
the machinations and menaces of insidious and successful trea¬ 
son. Had George IV. still occupied the British throne, I am 
persuaded that his discrowned and deserted ally would have 
been welcomed with undiminished cordiality, and still acknow- 
ledged as the rightful sovereign of France, in which case the 
other European potentates would, in all probability, have unani¬ 
mously followed this example. Being at the time on a visit at 
the Pavilion, and having long been honoured with a place in his 
regard, I respectfully urged upon King William how wise, as well 
as becoming, it would be on his part to embrace the illustrious 
exile with the same magnanimous and munificent kindness 
which Louis XIV. manifested towards James II. My appeal, 



LETTER FROM SIR G. SINCLAIR TO COUNT DE CHAMBORD. L>31 


however, to his better feelings, although well received, was wholly 
unavailing. 

In this extract from the letter of Sir George Sinclair 
to the Count de Chambord,—which letter is of sufficient 
length to form a pamphlet of moderate size,—there is 
much information which will be new to most persons, and 
which possesses great historic interest. As Sir George was 
at that time moving in circles of society in which the 
most correct knowledge must have existed in relation 
not only to what was going on in the Court of St. 
James’s, but in all the leading Courts of Europe, there can 
be no question that what he states accords with the fact, 
-that had George the Fourth only lived a few weeks 
longer, Charles the Tenth would, through the friendship 
and influence of the English monarch, have been restored 
to the throne of France. In that case, neither Louis 
Philippe nor Louis Napoleon would ever have been the 
possessors of supreme power—the one as King, and the 
other as Emperor—in that great country. 

In Sir George’s letter to the Count de Chambord lie 
mentions a fact, which furnishes one of the most practical 
proofs which could be given of the sincerity and depth of 
his sympathy with him whom he regarded as the rightful 
ruler of France. It was his earnest desire, had the thing 
been possible, to place Thurso Castle at the Count’s dis¬ 
posal as an asylum during the period of his exile. There 
is something so profoundly touching as well as singularly 
beautiful in the language of that part of Sir George’s 
letter in which he alludes to this circumstance, that I 
am sure it will give a special gratification to those into 
whose hands this volume may come, to read his own 
words. “ When,” he says, “ I returned, in autumn, to 






232 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

this [Thurso Castle] ancestral dwelling, disappointed and 
disheartened by the stiff and summary repudiation of my 
earnest and emphatic appeal to royal sympathy on behalf 
of royal sorrow, I often, at that time, and for many a 
year thereafter, during silent and solitary rambles along 
the lofty cliffs in its vicinity, was wont to picture to 
myself, by the aid of an eager and excited imagination, 
what unsullied and unselfish satisfaction I should have 
enjoyed, if the dimensions of this sea-girt and sequestered 
Castle could have been enlarged in proportion to its 
owner s affectionate devotedness, so that a venerated and 
vilified monarch, with the members of his interesting 
and united family—and, above all, the majestic, and, I 
had almost said, martyred daughter of Louis XVI.—whom 
all France, on the principle of retributive and expiatory 
justice, should have longed to see one day seated on her 
murdered father’s throne—might have been urged and 

O O 

entreated to accept an asylum within its walls, and 
welcomed as its honoured and permanent inmates, until 
the infuriated and infatuated land from which they were 
ruthlessly and recklessly expatriated, having filled up the 
measure of its crimes and of its calamities, recalled them 
with tears of penitence and humiliation into its bosom.” 

But though Sir George felt that Thurso Castle would not 
afford adequate accommodation for Charles the Tenth and 
his suite,—limited as that ancestral residence of the Sin¬ 
clair family was, compared with the royal residence of 
the Tuileries,—he did not cease to take a deep interest 
in endeavouring to find a suitable asylum for the royal 
exiles. He mentions that, on the circumstances of the 
case being placed before the Countess of Dysart, matters 
were all but arranged for Charles the Tenth and his 





LETTER FROM SIR G. SINCLAIR TO COUNT DE CHAMBORD. 23) 

attendants finding a suitable place of abode in Ham 
House, when it was intimated to the exiled monarch 
that Government had provided the accommodation be¬ 
fitting his position in Holyrood House. Though, with 
his usual modesty, Sir George does not give the slightest 
indication, in what lie says on the subject of an asylum 
in Ham House being about to be offered to Charles by 
the Countess of Dysart, of his having taken any part 
in the making the arrangements for the residence of 
royalty in that historically-interesting house,—I may 
mention that it was chiefly through his instrumentality 
that the arrangements for the purpose had been all but 
completed. Sir George felt indignant at the conduct of 
the AVellington Government in not having offered Chaides 
an asylum in St. James’s,—just as he thought that the 
exiled monarch had committed a great mistake in not 
throwing himself for protection on Austria or Prussia, or 
some other foreign Power, instead of on England. On 
these points, and condemning the treacherous conduct 
of Louis Philippe in the part he played in the Revo¬ 
lution of 1830,—still writing to the Count de Cham- 
bord,—Sir George Sinclair expresses himself in emphatic 
and explicit language. He says— 

The frigid and imcourteous reception which your venerable 
predecessor experienced in this country was most disastrous and 
discouraging, as well as ungenerous and unjust. It constituted, 
I have no doubt, one of his Majesty’s main reasons for declining 
to take the advice which, with many expressions of attachment 
and respect, I tendered to him, in writing, whilst he resided at 
Lulworth, namely, that he should, without a moment’s delay, 
reassert his indefeasible rights, and recall his most untoward and 
impolitic abdication, on two perfectly adequate grounds—first, 
that it had been extorted by force, cunning, and misrepresenta- 



234 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

tion; and, secondly, that it had not been absolute, but condi¬ 
tional, and had consequently become null and void by the non- 
fulfilment of the express stipulation, that you should, in virtue 
of it, be recognised as successor to the crown. I feel confident 
that this course would have been attended with success if Charles 
X. had repaired to Vienna, Berlin, or St. Petersburg; and I still 
think that such a step would have been judicious as well as dig¬ 
nified, even if it had been adopted in such a painful and dis¬ 
heartening position as his Majesty was (I daresay unexpectedly) 
placed in when allowed to hire Lulworth, instead of being forth¬ 
with invited to London. But St. James’s seems never destined 
to be what St. Germain’s was—an asylum consecrated to sym¬ 
pathy with misfortune. It did not prove so to Charles X., and 
was as little thrown open for the reception of his astute and as¬ 
piring successor when driven, at the end of eighteen years, under 
circumstances of exact as well as equitable retribution, from the 
throne, which he lost, as he had acquired it, by an unexpected 
outbreak of popular fury and fanaticism. When the genius of 
revolution succeeded in enticing Louis Philippe to achieve an 
unhappy and unnatural triumph over his own nobler aspirations 
of loyalty and gratitude, so as to hunger for a chair only empty 
through mob-violence, and invest himself and his family with the 
robes and responsibilities of royalty before their hour was ripe 
(a course which even the less elevated motives of sound policy 
and self-interest should have prevented him from adopting), he 
might, at that crisis, have become one of the greatest, as well as 
the happiest, men whom the world ever admired or applauded. 
When the tempter spread forth before his eyes, and placed 
within his reach, all the provinces of France, both at home and 
abroad, and the glory of them, and whispered in the ear of his 
ambition, “ All these things will J give thee, if thou fall down 
and worship me, by breaking the oath which thou hast sworn to 
a confiding monarch, and concurring in the expulsion of himself 
and of his dynasty from their home,” if he had exclaimed, in a 
spirit of indignant and incorruptible integrity, “ Get thee hence, 
for it is written, thou shalt honour the king, and not forswear 
thyself,” he might, I repeat, by manfully espousing his royal 
master’s cause at the outset, have prevented the triumph of 
treachery, ensured the peace of Europe, acquired an immortal 


MEETINGS WITH CHARLES X. AND SPANISH EXILES. 


235 


reputation, and, as the richest, most respected, and most in¬ 
fluential subject in the realm, have enjoyed such a measure of 
authority and consideration as would have been infinitely pre¬ 
ferable to the precarious grasp of a sceptre to which he possessed 
so dubious a claim, and which he wielded under the forebodings 
of unceasing apprehension and anxiety. 

Sir George Sinclair was in the habit of meeting 
Charles, when in London, at the house of the Duke de 
Coigny, one of the most distinguished ’and devoted 
friends of the Prince. The Duke was, indeed, a sharer 
in the exile of the dethroned monarch. At the house, in 
Spanish Place, of the Duke and Duchess de Coigny, 
Sir George not only met Charles, but all the leading 
emigrant nobility of France. Sir George thus describes 
these interesting reunions :—“ Through the kindness of 
the Count de Coigny, I was, about five years before the 
restoration, introduced to liis brother, the Marechal Due 
de Coigny, who, with the Duchess, resided at a small but 
very neatly furnished house in Spanish Place, which, 
very often in the course of every week, was frequented 
in the evening by the Count d’Artois and several of the 
members of his family, as well as by many of the most 
illustrious of the emigrant nobility at that time residing 
in London. I was most kindly welcomed; and it was 
soon perceived how cordially I entered into the principles, 
and appreciated the motives, of the august and attached 
circle in which I was permitted to move. During several 
years I went there as often as I pleased, or, in other words, 
as often as I could; and it was impossible not to imbibe 
a most affectionate reverence for the different members of 
a social reunion, where there was exhibited so striking a 
display of manners the most distinguished by refinement, 
and feelings the best calculated to inspire confidence, 



236 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


respect, and admiration. The greater number of the 
guests (among others, the venerable Marechal dc Vis- 
menil, the Comte de Chartres, &c., &c.), assembled at an 
earlier hour than any of the members of the royal family; 
but as soon as “ Monsieur ” was announced, the whole 
party rose from their seats, and formed a semicircle 
to receive his Royal Highness, who, on entering the 
apartment, saluted them with fascinating elegance of 
manners (in which, perhaps, his contemporary George 
IV. was his only rival), addressed some obliging speech, 
or directed some kind inquiry to every one—and then 
made a gracious signal with his hand, after which all 
resumed their avocations, and his Royal Highness gene¬ 
rally engaged in some game during the greater part of 
the evening. He never, as King of France, in the pleni¬ 
tude of his power, and with innumerable rewards to dis¬ 
tribute amongst those who surrounded his throne, could 
have received more striking and unequivocal demonstra¬ 
tions of the most cordial love, and most ardent loyalty, 
than were in every possible way manifested towards him 
by these devoted adherents of his family during the season 
of exile and obscurity. 

But it was not in society alone that Sir George Sinclair 
met Charles the Tenth. He was privileged to have private 
interviews with the exiled monarch when the latter was 
resident in Holyrood House. In a small pamphlet, printed 
for private circulation, he gives a graphic and deeply 
touching account of one of these interviews with Charles. 
But though this account first appeared in substance in 
a brochure originally written, not for publication but 
solely for private circulation among a few friends, it was 
afterwards enlarged in a letter written to me in my 



INTERVIEW WITH CHARLES THE TENTH. 


237 


capacity as the Editor of a morning journal. As so 
enlarged, I subjoin an extract from it. Sir George says— 

When Charles X. entered the apartment, at the first interview 
which took place between his Majesty and myself, his countenance 
beamed with a gracious smile, beneath which, however, there 
seemed to lurk a dark cloud of habitual sadness-, and when he per¬ 
ceived that every feature of the attached and devoted friend whom, 
under circumstances of such awful vicissitude, he now beheld 
once more after an interval of several years, indicated the most 
poignant emotions of sympathy and sorrow, his expression in¬ 
stantly changed,—he held out both his hands,—and whilst his 
auditor, overpowered by his feelings, was paying to him every 
homage of respect which would have been due to his own sove¬ 
reign at his first introduction, the king exclaimed, with much 
emphasis, “ Ah, mon cher, j’ai deja su, et je vois bien a present, 
que vos anciens sentiments pour moi ne se sont jamais dementis; 
et c’est de tout mon cceur que je vous en remercie.”* The con¬ 
versation then assumed a most cordial and confidential tone ; 
and many subjects were discussed, into which it is not deemed 
prudent or proper to enter. When, however, the author observed, 
that all the chief authors and instigators of the Revolution,— 
such as Lafitte, Benjamin Constant, Lafayette, &c.,—had already 
experienced mortification and disappointment, with the excep¬ 
tion of him who had been the chief author of that great 
calamity, his Majesty replied, “ Vous avez bien raison,—aucun 
de ceux que vous avez nommes, n’a tird de la revolution les 
avantages qu’il en esperoit,—et quant a l’autre, attendez seule- 
ment, et soyez sur que son jour viendra.” f 

“ It was on his return from such an interview as this, 
with a heart full of admiration for the virtues, and of 
sympathy for the sufferings of this' most amiable of men, 
and most maligned of monarchs, and not less animated 

* All! my dear, I already knew, and I now feel that your old sentiments 
towards me have never been belied ; and I thank you for them with all my 
heart. 

f You are quite right. Not one of those whom you have named has de¬ 
rived from the Revolution the advantages which he anticipated 5 and as 
for the other, only wait, and be assured his time will come. 



238 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


by emotions of disgust and indignation at the perfidy 
and ingratitude by which he had been betrayed and 
ruined, that the author ventured to address a poem 
to his friend Cardinal de Latil, which was entitled a 
Philippic, and extended to 150 or 200 lines, of which, 
however, no copy was preserved, and the commencement 
only has been recollected.” 

The commencement is as follows, and I am sure the 
only regret will be, when it is read, that any portion of 
it should have been lost:— 

O toi, qui d^tronas ton maitre legitime, 

Ton bienfaiteur jadis, aujourd’liui ta victime, 

Tu pus done arracher, sans honte et sans effroi, 

A ton Dieu ses autels, et son sceptre a ton Roi ! 

En vain de mille amis la juste prevoyance 
S’efforca d’alarmer sa noble confiance; 

Son coeur, muni de foi, d’honneur et de bonte, 

Repoussa les soup^ons de leur zkle eclair^ ; 

Sachant mieux pardonner que prevoir une injure, 

II nourrit un serpent, sans craindre sa morsure ! 

Le titre dont ses fils etaient seuls revetus, 

Fut le prix de tes voeux, et non de tes vei’tus, kc. 

* X * * 

Sous un Roi Citoyen, tout citoyen est Roi. 

I subjoin a literal translation of the above, which is 
divided into an equivalent number of lines to facilitate 
reference where it may be wished. The best French 
scholars I have consulted concur in saying that it would 
be impossible to give the lines in metrical poetry. 

O, thou who dost dethrone thy legitimate master, 

Thy benefactor yesterday, to-day thy victim, 

Thou canst thus snatch, without shame and without fear, 

From thy God His altars, and from thy king his sceptre ! 

In vain the just prescience of a thousand friends 
Strove to alarm his noble confidence ; 

His heart, endowed with faith, honour, and goodness, 

Repulsed the suspicions of their enlightened zeal; 

Knowing better how to pardon than to foresee an injury, 

He nourished a serpent without fearing its bite ! 


A TOEM IX RELATION TO CHARLES THE TENTH. 


239 


Tlie title* with which its sons alone were invested, 

"Was the price of thy vows, and not of thy virtues, &c. 

* * * * 

Under a Citizen King, every citizen is king. 

On another occasion, after one of his interviews with 
Charles the Tenth and some of his friends, Sir George Sin¬ 
clair addressed a poem to Cardinal de Latil, of which only 
a few passages, as in the other case, have been preserved. 
The following are the lines which have not been lost:— 

Digne et cher Cardinal, martyr d’un saint devoir, 

Ah ! n’abandonnons point un trop precieux espoir ! 

Ce roi, l’objet cheri d’une douleur profonde, 

Trahi par des ingrats, et meconnu du monde ; 

* * * *• 

Ce roi, dont l’anarchie et l’affreux atheisme 
Denigrent la vertu du nom de fanatisme ; 

* * * * 

Ce roi, tant regrette dans le sein des provinces, 

Et qu’ont abandoning des pusillanimes princes, 

* * •» * 

Sans songer que d’un roi l’eclatante infortune 
Pent bientot amener leur mine commune— 

Ce roi ne mourra point eloigne de ces lieux 
Ornde par les bienfaits de tant de hauts aieux, 

Des deputes viendront, remplis d’un juste zele, 

Mettre a ses pieds les clefs de leur ville infidele— 

Le prier a genoux de reprendre des droits 
Par le grace de Dieu reserve pour vos rois— 

Des souverains bientot l’ambassade unanime 
Lui dira, “ Viens tirer ton peuple de l’abime— 

Viens rendre a la patrie un siecle de douceur, 

Punir Vingrotitude en faisant son bonheur — 

Retablir les autels, eteindre les complots— 

Rendre a l’Europe enfin un durable repos, 

Et briser, au milieu de ses fureurs tragiques, 

Le despotisme affreux des brigands anarchiques.” 


* A ver} r distinguished French scholar, and who has a thorough acquaint¬ 
ance with French literature, writes to me in reference to this line, as follows :— 
“ ‘ The title,’ See. This line seems obscure, but I suppose, in this address to the 
Due d’Orleans (on the forced abdication of Charles X., called Louis Philippe, 
citizen king), it alludes to the various titles and privileges conferred on him 
and successively confirmed by Louis XVIII. and by Charles X., despite the 
grave suspicions entertained by many loyal followers of the elder branch 
of the Bourbons against him. The writings of M. Nettement, contemporary 
with Charles X., allude to these only too well-founded suspicions.” 




240 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Translation. 

Worthy and dear Cardinal, martyr of a holy duty, 

Ah ! let us not abandon a too precious hope ! 

This king, the cherished object of a profound grief, 

Betrayed by the ungrateful, and disowned by the world ; 

* * * * 

This king, of whom anarchy and frightful atheism 
Traduce the virtue, by naming it fanaticism ; 

* * * * 

This king, so much regretted in the bosom of provinces, 

And whom pusillanimous princes have abandoned, 

* *■ * * 

Without considering that of a king the piercing misfortune 
May soon bring about their common ruin— 

This king shall not die alienated from these places 
Adorned by the benefits of so many high ancestors. 

Deputies shall come, filled with just zeal, 

To place at his feet the keys of their unfaithful city— 

To pray him on their knees to take back again rights 
By the grace of God reserved for your kings— 

Of sovereigns soon the unanimous embassy 

Will say, “ Come, draw thy people from the abyss — 

Come to restore to the country an age of gentleness, 

To punish ingratitude in making its happiness — 

To re-establish altars, and extinguish plots — 

To restore to Europe at last a durable repose—• 

And to shatter, in the midst of her tragic furies, 

The frightful despotism of anarchical brigands.” 

The Cardinal wept during the perusal of these lines. 
I give another extract from the same brochure which, 
though of considerable length, will, I am sure, be read 
with great interest. With what relates to Charles the 
Tenth, there are mixed up several facts and reflections in 
connection with the general affairs of France and the 
royal families of that country. Sir George says— 

The portentous catastrophe which has so unexpectedly and 
so instantaneously overturned the revolutionary throne of France, 
and menaces the most ancient, and, apparently, most firmly- 
established dynasties in Europe with swift destruction, may be 
contemplated in divers points of view, as regards its causes, its 
circumstances, and its results. We mean to dwell at present 
upon one aspect of this mighty event, with which many writers 


THE FLIGHT OF LOUIS PHILIPPE FROM FRANCE. 241 

of the most opposite sentiments appear to have been deeply and 
simultaneously impressed—namely, that it is, so far as the de¬ 
throned and exiled family are concerned, one of the most striking 
and manifest instances on record of the Almighty’s retributive 
justice. True it is, undoubtedly, that, in many cases of human 
criminality, vengeance is not executed speedily, and sometimes 
not at all, in this world ; but, in the sovereignty of the Divine 
dispensations, such proofs occasionally present themselves of an 
exact correspondence between the offence and the punishment, 
as can scarcely be controverted or overlooked by any observer, 
however prejudiced, or however superficial. 

By the great mass of mankind, though from a variety of dif¬ 
ferent motives, the overthrow of the Orleans dynasty has been 
viewed, not only without a single pang of regret, but with emo¬ 
tions of intense satisfaction. 

Louis Philippe owed his power to intrigue and usurpation,— 
maintained his precarious and ill-gotten authority by carrying 
to the greatest excess the very principles on account of having 
had recourse to which he contrived to tear the diadem from the 
venerable brow of Charles X. ; and he has, at length, been ex¬ 
pelled from France without a single arm being raised for his 
support, or a single word uttered in his defence. Displaying, in 
the hour of trial, an entire absence of moral courage and self- 
command, his conscience seems to have at length awakened; he 
fled when none pursued, and, after having witnessed the most 
significant and irrefragable proofs that the general aversion was 
almost superseded by a still more ardent feeling of contempt, he 
exclaimed, in the bitterness of his soul, “ Comme Charles X.! 
Comme Charles X. ! ” Thus it was that the brethren of Jo¬ 
seph, when themselves involved in distress and perplexity, as 
we are informed in Holy Writ, called to mind their own cruelty and 
injustice, of which they then were reaping the fruits, and said, 
“ We are verily guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw 
the anguish of his soul, when he besought us, and we did not 
hear; therefore is this distress come upon us ; ” and thus, as 
we learn from the same infallible authority, a guilty monarch 
exclaimed, when “ his sin found him out,” and a just chastise¬ 
ment befell him, “ As I have done, so hath God requited 
me.” 

R 


242 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

What was this hut an anticipation of “ Comme Charles X. ! 
Comme Charles X.! ” 

It is, however, not a little remarkable that, whilst in every 
particular there is the most obvious and undeniable resemblance 
between the events attendant upon the downfall of this true 
representative of St. Louis, and those which occurred at the expul¬ 
sion of the usurper, who betrayed him, yet that, in each parti¬ 
cular, there is, also, some circumstance of disparity which renders 
the latter consummation more bitter and more degrading. 
First, in each instance the final catastrophe was preceded by a 
three days’ conflict; but in the case of Charles X. the devoted¬ 
ness of the troops was more conspicuous and more durable, their 
resistance more protracted, and many of them remained faithful 
even after the crisis of defeat. Secondly, in each instance the 
king resigned in favour of his grandson, and the proposal was 
rejected ; but on this latter occasion the child and his mother 
actually appeared in the Chambers, and were compelled to retire 
in a manner the most painful and contumelious. Thirdly, both 
Charles X. and Louis Philippe were obliged to leave France ; 
but the former, after his abdication, maintained, whilst he con¬ 
tinued in his palace, the state and demeanour of a king ; a large 
proportion of his faithful followers continued to surround him ; 
he was attended to the place of embarkation by all the members 
of his family, by one of his marshals, and by a guard ; he was 
everywhere received, during a journey performed at leisure, and 
without any obstacle or interruption, with respectful silence, and, 
no doubt, often with secret sympathy; and, on taking leave of 
his weeping escort, and of those friends who remained behind, he 
published a dignified and affecting proclamation, which contained 
not a single expression either of complaint or remonstrance, or 
any reflection upon the traitors and incendiaries, by whom he 
had been misled and betrayed. Louis Philippe, also, was com¬ 
pelled to leave his palace, and take refuge in the same land 
which had afforded an asylum to his predecessor; but how much 
more humiliating were all the circumstances by which his retreat 
was distinguished ! Here, indeed, it may be said that he acted 
not “ comme Charles X.,” but rather like Chrononhotontholosos, 
who is represented as exclaiming— 


CHARACTER OF CHARLES THE TENTH. 


243 


Co, call a coach—and let a coach be called, 

And let the man that calls it be the caller ; 

And in his calling 1 , let him nothing 1 call 

But coach, coach, coach ! 0, for a coach, ye g - ods ! 

Concealing himself in a brougham, with the queen,—his family 
all acting on the “ sauve qui pent ” and “ every-man-for-himself ” 
principle,—compelled to traverse, in disguise, and as a fugitive, 
the country over which he, a few clays before, had exercised a 
despotic sway,—he at length, with difficulty, landed on the shore 
of Great Britain; a land which had been described, in the month 
of February in the preceding year, by a morning paper in the 
interests of her Majesty’s confidential advisers, as “the most 
deadly and unscrupulous enemy ! ”—a paper which denounced, 
in the self-same paragraph, “ his selfish and insidious schemes ! ” 
And one of the first declarations uttered by him, after landing, 
was to draw a most unfair and unfounded contrast between 
himself and Charles X. ; as if he, forsooth, had not been guilty 
of more gross, more frequent, and more prolonged violations of 
the charter than ever were attempted by Charles X.,—as if it 
had been by Charles X. that the liberty of the press was so fre¬ 
quently outraged, fortifications erected,—not for defending, but 
for coercing, Paris,—so many political persecutions attempted, 
so much public money extorted for his family,—such unblushing 
corruption fostered and practised in every department of the 
State ! 

It may be well that I should here remark that the 
frequency and emphasis with which Sir George Sinclair 
dwells on the estimable and amiable qualities of Charles 
the Tenth may be regarded by some as being magnified, 
because viewed through the medium of friendship. I 
am in a position to state, from sources of a private 
nature, that however great may have been the friend¬ 
ship of Sir George for the exiled monarch of France, 
that friendship did not lead him to exaggerate in the 
least the private virtues of that unfortunate Prince. 
It was my privilege to be personally acquainted with 


241 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


the late Hon. Archibald Macdonald, son of the Lord 
Macdonald who was so popular towards the close of 
the last and the commencement of the present cen¬ 
tury, and he furnished me, in our private conversation 
together, with many particulars regarding Charles the 
Tenth which were wholly unknown, and most pro¬ 
bably ever will be, to the world, respecting that un¬ 
fortunate monarch. As the Princess Polignac was the 
sister of Mr. Macdonald, and her husband, consequently 
his brother-in-law, the Prime Minister of Charles, during 
the brief but in many respects brilliant reign of that 
ultimately unfortunate Prince, it will be easily under¬ 
stood that he must have had a more minute acquaintance 
with the principles, the feelings, and the habits of Charles, 
in all the private relations of life, than almost any other 
man living without the vicinity of the royal household. 
Well, then, let me here, on the authority of the brother- 
in-law of the Prince Polignac, who enjoyed the perfect 
confidence of Charles the Tenth, and whose memorable, 
but most unfortunate Qrdonnances cost, in 1830, that 
monarch his throne, and were the cause of his exile,—let 
me here distinctly state that all that Mr. Macdonald said 
to me respecting the exceedingly amiable disposition, and 
the private virtues of Charles, was in perfect accord 
with the statements of Sir George Sinclair on that sub¬ 
ject. In making this incidental allusion to the late Mr. 
Archibald Macdonald, I am sure I shall be excused if I 
take the opportunity of stating that Mr. Macdonald was 
one of the most interesting men it ever was my good 
fortune to meet with. He was one of the greatest per¬ 
sonal friends of George the Fourth, and was intimately 
acquainted with nearly all the leading nobility and 



IION. ARCHIBALD MACDONALD. 


215 


eminent Members of the House of Commons during the 
first quarter of the present century. His fund of anec¬ 
dotes illustrative of high life during that period was 
singularly large and varied; and I have often thought 
that had he written his autobiography with fulness and 
with freedom, it would have been one of the most inte¬ 
resting works of the kind which have appeared in the 
present century. Let me add that Mr. Macdonald was 
a man of the most generous nature, and one of the 
most interesting companions with whom any one could 
meet. 

In the brochure of Sir George, to which I have thus 
called attention,—printed, as I before said, only for 
private circulation,—he was very severe on Louis 
Philippe, because he regarded him, as also the Duke, 
his eldest son, as parties to the conspiracy which led 
to the dethronement of Charles the Tenth. From all the 
attention I have been able to give to the subject, and 
remembering the Spanish marriage affair, I have no 
doubt whatever that Louis Philippe was deeply impli¬ 
cated in that conspiracy; but the evidence of the 
Duke of Orleans, his eldest son s, privacy to the plot, is 
not, to my mind, sufficiently clear to justify our pro¬ 
nouncing a verdict of guilty against him. 

Sir George sent copies of the unpublished brochure to 
several statesmen of eminence with whom he was per¬ 
sonally acquainted ; Mr. Disraeli was one of these, and, 
in writing to Sir George to thank him for it, he attached 
so much importance to it, as to say, “It is animated, 
chivalric, and full of interesting matter. It is, in fact, a 
Chapter in your Memoirs” It is a curious fact that it 
was not until long after I had chosen the title of “ Me- 



240 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


inoirs ” for the biography of Sir George, that I ascertained 
that Mr. Disraeli assumed not only that there would 
be published a “ Life ” of Sir George, but that it would 
be called “Memoirs.” Equally strange is it that I should 
not only have formed the intention of devoting an entire 
Chapter to this event in Sir George’s career, but almost 
completed the chapter before I had the slightest idea 
that Mr. Disraeli had assumed that a “ chapter ” would 
be devoted to this part of Sir George’s life. 

The brochure of Sir George Sinclair was, as I have 
just mentioned, sent as a private communication to a 
number of the leading statesmen of the day—most of 
whom were personal friends of the writer. Among these 
was the Earl of Aberdeen. As he soon afterwards 
became Prime Minister, his answer to the letter of Sir 
George, which accompanied the brochure , will be read 
with interest. It was as follows :— 


Haddo House, November 21, 1848. 

My dear Sir George, 

I have received and read your pamphlet. I rejoice that any¬ 
thing should afford the opportunity of renewed communication. 
Although it is true that I differ widely from some of the senti¬ 
ments in your publication, at the same time there is much with 
which I entirely agree. No man entertained a higher respect 
for Charles the Tenth, or more sincerely lamented his expul¬ 
sion. The king knew this well. The acknowledgment of his 
successor did not admit of delay or doubt. France was unani¬ 
mous ; and not a hand was raised on behalf of the older branch. 
The new sovereign pledged himself to observe all the engage¬ 
ments of the monarchy, and gave us every guarantee for the 
duration of peace and friendship. 

I have no doubt that it was owing entirely to the exertions of 
Louis Philippe that we escaped a Republic in 1830, and that no 
other man could have effected this but himself. Ever since 




SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S “ COMME CHARLES X.” 


247 


that time the efforts of the Republicans have been indefatigable, 
and they have at last succeeded in overthrowing the most friendly 
and most pacific ruler we have ever had in France. Guizot 
and Polignac were both my friends, and I have had to deal with 
both. I knew full well how to estimate them. Could I share 
your belief respecting the intrigues of Louis Philippe against the 
throne of Charles the Tenth, I should feel very differently ; but 
I am persuaded that he was a stranger to any such conspiracies. 
I recollect very well when he was in England as Duke of Orleans, 
in 1824. I was then Secretary of State, and he deeply lamented 
the blindness of the king he had attempted to advise, but was 
not listened to, and was suspected. He wished me to interfere, 
and even spoke of an impending catastrophe. 

However, we must now see what can be made of the Republic. 
I have no confidence in its duration; but in what manner the 
return to monarchy is to be effected, or to what dynasty we are 
to return, I am quite unable to say. 

Believe me, my dear Sir George, 

Very truly yours, 

Aberdeen. 

Considering that this letter was written by one who 
had been Foreign Secretary for many years, who was at 
the time the acknowledged representative of the then 
powerful party in the State who had taken up an inter¬ 
mediate position between the more liberal Whigs and 
the more extreme Tories, and that it was written only 
four years before he was Prime Minister, it may be 
regarded as a State paper of no inconsiderable import¬ 
ance. No doubt the Earl of Aberdeen was perfectly 
sincere in the favourable opinions which he here ex¬ 
presses respecting the character and conduct of Louis 
Philippe. I have intimated, in another place, my own 
views on the subject. I leave it to each of the readers 
of this volume to come to his own conclusion in rela¬ 
tion to it. This much, however, I will say, with all con- 


248 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


fidence, that soon after the above letter was written, 
public opinion in this country underwent a great change 
respecting Louis Philippe. With no less confidence I 
will add, that that change was not in his favour, but the 
reverse. History, I feel assured, will record a verdict 
on the point in accordance with that which has been 
given by the present generation. 


CHAPTER XI. 


Elevation of the Duke of Clarence to the Throne—Incident at Bushcy House— 
Mr. Sinclair's Intimacy with his Royal Highness as King— Refuses an 
Invitation to Dine with the King on a Sunday—Letter to his Majesty 
stating the grounds of his Refusal—Letter on the State of the Country. 


My last chapter was chiefly devoted to the events of 
the year 1830, so far as they related to French royalty, 
and especially as they were connected with the mis¬ 
fortunes which befell the elder branch of the Bourbons in 
that memorable year. In the same year the royalty of 
our own country experienced important changes. George 
the Fourth died a few weeks before Charles the Tenth 
was driven from his throne and fled to this country to 
seek an asylum on the shores of Great Britain. The 
Duke of Clarence succeeded his brother, George the 
Fourth, under the title of William the Fourth. There 
will be therefore a conventional fitness in my devoting 
this chapter to statements and allusions respecting the 
royalty of our own land, in so far as these have a 
relation, more or less direct, to the subject of these 
Memoirs. 

When the Duke of Clarence ascended the throne of 
these realms, his Royal Highness and Sir George, then 
Mr. Sinclair, had cherished for the long period of 
fourteen years a friendship for each other which led to 


250 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


great personal intimacy and an extensive correspondence. 
When Mr. Sinclair, as I have stated in a previous 
chapter, first heard, from an acquaintance, the account 
of George the Fourth’s death, not in literal language, but 
in these words, “ Your friend, the Duke, is King !— 
terms which implied the death of George—his epigram¬ 
matic remark was, “ But is the King my friend ? ” The 
subsequent conduct of William the Fourth showed that 
his elevation to the throne did not diminish the regard 
for Mr. Sinclair which he had entertained and habitually 
manifested when Duke of Clarence. Of the estimation 
in which Mr. Sinclair was held by his Royal Highness I 
have given various proofs in what I have before stated, 
but there was one proof of this that I have not given, 
but which ought not to be omitted. This was furnished 
shortly before the accession of his Royal Highness to the 
Throne. The latter entertained a very decided dislike to 
those who held evangelical views, and especially to those 
laymen and clergymen whose names were much before 
the public as the advocates of evangelicalism. In 
speaking of the views indicated by that term, he usually 
expressed himself in words sufficiently strong to show the 
intensity of his opposition to vital religion. He always 
spoke of them as Methodists,—that word being at this 
time regarded as the most expressive of mingled 
aversion and scorn which could be employed in relation 
to those, whether clergymen or laymen, who had openly 
and boldly avowed their belief in evangelical principles. 
On the occasion to which I have referred, when Sir 
George was dining as one of a large party with the Duke 
at Bushey Park, his Royal Highness commenced, as he 
often did, an attack on a particular “ Methodist ” clergy- 


MR. SINCLAIR’S FIDELITY TO IIIS RELIGIOUS PRINCIPLES. 251 


man, who had recently received an appointment to a church 
in the neighbourhood. Sir George boldly and success¬ 
fully defended the clergyman so assailed by his Royal 
Highness. After the discussion had proceeded some 
time, the latter said, “All I know is, that the bishop 
and I have got our eye upon him, and we shan’t lose 
sight of him, JL promise you.” The bishop referred to 
was Dr. Blomfield, at that time the Bishop of London. 
To this unkind remark of the Duke, Mr. Sinclair made 
this reply:—“ Depend upon it, sir, that One who is 
greater than either your Royal Highness or the bishop 
will protect him against you both.” I could point to 
nothing in history more noble than the display of moral 
courage and fidelity to principle given in these remarks, 
addressed to a brother of the king, and one who had 
every prospect of being himself before long the occupant 
of the British throne. Massillon’s commencement of one 
of his sermons preached especially to as well as before 
Louis the Fourteenth, has been much admired for the 
moral courage of the preacher : “ Sire,” said Massillon, 
“ I have no compliments for your Majesty, because I 
find none in the Gospel.” I have always admired an 
incident having some resemblance to this in the case of 
Mr. Perceval, Prime Minister to George the Third, which 
incident has been mentioned to me by one of Mr. Perceval’s 
sons. On one occasion, while Mr. Perceval was attending 
divine worship in St. Margaret’s Church, contiguous to 
Westminster Abbey, George the Third sent a message to 
his Prime Minister, commanding his presence at St. 
James’s. The answer of Mr. Perceval was, “ Give my 
duty to my Royal master, and say that I will presently 
wait upon his Majesty. Just now I am engaged in 



252 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

paying my devotional services to my Sovereign in 
Heaven.” But it is to be noted, that what Mr. Sinclair 
said to William the Fourth, a short time before his 
accession to the crown of these realms, he said to his 
Boyal Highness's face and at his own table. To my 
mind, therefore, there was a greater display of moral 
courage and faithfulness to principle than in either of 
the other cases. 

The circumstance of John Knox, the great Scotch 
reformer, having openly and in their presence denounced 
Queen Mary and her Court for her and their vices, has 
always been regarded as worthy of all admiration. In 
that admiration I fully share; but I cannot concur with 
those who think that the incident furnishes the most 
remarkable proof recorded in history of moral courage, in 
association with faithfulness to principle. It was pre- 
eminently the vocation of John Knox to denounce sin, 
and those who were guilty of it. Besides, he possessed 
more than an average amount of that sternness often 
verging on rudeness, which was one of the great cha¬ 
racteristics of the times in which the great reformer 
lived. But Mr. Sinclair was a layman, and a man of 
the most courteous and polished manners. He was, 
besides, mixing habitually with royalty, and the highest 
aristocratic society ; and it was, as I have already 
remarked, at the table of royalty, and in the presence of 
persons occupying the highest social position in the land, 
that he spoke the language I have quoted. There was, 
therefore, in my judgment, a greater display of moral 
heroism in the conduct of Mr. Sinclair on this occasion 
than in that even of John Knox in denouncing Mary, 
Queen of Scots, and her Court; and I repeat that I 


WILLIAM THE FOURTH’S FRIENDSHIP FOR MR. SINCLAIR. 253 

know not, taking all the circumstances into account, 
anything nobler of the kind in the pages of history. 

The man who could, under all the circumstances, have 
spoken as Mr. Sinclair did, manifestly possessed the 
martyr spirit in the highest degree. He would not have 
counted his life dear to him, had the alternative been 
placed before him,—the renunciation of his principles ns 
one holding evangelical views, or the martyr’s death. 

But what was the result of this boldness and attach¬ 
ment to the truth as it is in Jesus, on the part of Mr. 
Sinclair ? That is a question which will naturally be 
asked. The answer furnished an addition to the myriads 
of similar proofs which have been afforded before, that a 
firm and faithful adherence to lofty Christian principles 
commands the respect of even those who have never 
themselves experienced the power of those high and holy 
principles. While the company, consisting of a large 
circle of royal and aristocratic friends of the Duke, were 
astonished at the boldness of Mr. Sinclair, his Royal 
Highness immediately, and in the most affable manner, 
exclaimed, “ Come, Sinclair, we had better say no more 
about it. These are matters in which you and I are as 
sure always to differ as we are to agree in many others. 
Let us take another glass of sherry together.” Had Sir 
George Sinclair never done another meritorious action in 
his life, this display of moral heroism would have sufficed 
to proclaim to the world that he had not lived in vain. 

But as I have now come to speak of Mr. Sinclair’s 
friendship with the Duke of Clarence after he had become 
King, I must confine myself to matters immediately 
connected with their intimacy during the reign of 
William. I have made the reference to the above in- 



254 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


cident as an illustration, in addition to the various 
illustrations I have given before, of the exceeding inti¬ 
macy which subsisted between Mr. Sinclair and the 
Duke of Clarence, and of the high regard which his 
Royal Highness entertained and showed for him who is 
the subject of these pages. I have now to state that, as 
the Sovereign of these realms, William the Fourth was as 
warmly attached to Mr. Sinclair as he had been before 
his elevation to the throne. He was invited not to 
dinners only at the table of his Sovereign, but to pay 
him a visit of a week or fortnight at a time to the 
Pavilion at Brighton. If, indeed, there were any differ¬ 
ence in the manifestations of respect for, and attention 
to, Mr. Sinclair, on the part of William the Fourth, they 
were rather more marked than before. 

On the other hand, the elevation of the Duke of . 
Clarence to the throne of the British Empire did not 
diminish in the slightest degree Mr. Sinclair's fidelity 
to his principles as a Christian, in the most exalted 
meaning of the word. A remarkable proof of this was 
furnished by Mr. Sinclair in relation to an invitation to 
dine with the King on a Sunday, which invitation Mr. 
Sinclair declined. Before, however, I myself make a 
special reference to this, I will quote what was written 
by Lady Colquhoun, Mr. Sinclair's sister, as her words are 
given in the “ Life " of that eminent and excellent lady, 
which was written by the late Rev. Dr. James Hamilton. 
What Lady Colquhoun said on the subject is prefaced by 
some general observations, which it is unnecessary to quote. 
What follows appears in that lady’s diary. “ January 15, 
1832.—Sir James arrived here in perfect safety last week 
and my brother George is also with us. He gave a 



255 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO WILLIAM THE FOURTH. 


noble proof to-day of devotion to the King of Kings. 
TV lien an invitation from the palace came for him to dine 
with our monarch on this sacred day, he did not hesitate 
a moment to send a refusal, which he did in most 
respectful and affectionate terms. How this will be 


taken it is impossible to say; but I rejoice that the 
opportunity has been afforded to my brother of showing 
his sincerity at the Court, and that I have a brother 
capable of acting thus. May the Almighty bless and 
preserve him ! ” 

On this entry in Lady Colquhoun’s diary, her 
biographer, Dr. Hamilton, remarks, “The incident to 
which the foregoing extract relates afforded great delight 
to Lady Colquhoun. Her brother was staying with her 
at the time, and as valued relics she preserved the card 
of invitation dated ‘Pavilion, January 15 , 1832 ,’and a 


copy of the answer, which she sought leave to transcribe. 
And we are sure that Sir George Sinclair will forgive the 

o o 

publication of that letter if it contribute, however re¬ 
motely, to a cause which he has much at heart. 


“ Sire,—• 

No one can value more than I do the honour and privilege of 
being at any time permitted to enjoy that social intercourse with 
which your Majesty has, on so many occasions, been pleased to 
indulge me for so many years. But I am fully aware with how 
much consideration your Majesty enters into the feelings, and 
sympathises with the wishes, of those whom you honour with 
your friendship. I have, for some time past, been led to enter¬ 
tain very different notions from those which I once cherished as 
to the observance of this day, and subscribe fully to the views 
which the Church and, I may add, the Legislature, have laid 
down with respect to its importance. Encouraged by the lati¬ 
tude of discussion which your Majesty has so long and so kindly 
vouchsafed, I lately took the liberty, though in opposition to 


25G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


3’our Majesty’s opinion, to maintain, that not merely a 'part, but 
the whole, of this day should be devoted to those great purposes 
for which Divine Authority has set it apart. I may be permit¬ 
ted to add, from grateful experience, that this decision has its 
reward even here. I have found that God honours those who 
honour Him, and, though encompassed with sin and infirmity, 
I can testify that He is not an austere master; that He has 
strength for all our weaknesses, indemnity for all our sacrifices, 
and consolation for all our troubles. 

I feel bound, on principle of conscience, to deny myself what 
is always one of my most valued gratifications, that of paying 
my humble and most affectionate respects this day, and must 
rest satisfied with renewing in my retirement those earnest 
supplications for your Majesty’s health and happiness which are 
equally dictated by regard for the public welfare, and by a 
thankfully cherished remembrance of much distinguished and 
unmerited kindness. 

I have the honour, &c., 

George Sinclair.” 

On the letter, Dr. Hamilton remarks, “ The sequel was 
no less worthy of the King. Next morning, while they 
were seated round the breakfast-table, a royal messenger 
arrived, charged with an invitation to the Pavilion that 
evening. His Majesty made no allusion to the letter; 
but to show how perfectly he appreciated the motives of 
his guest, he went beyond even his usual urbanity and 
kindness, and to the close of his reign no interruption 
occurred in a friendship equally honourable to the ac¬ 
complished commoner and to the frank and warm-hearted 
monarch. To every pious subject, it must always be a 
source of lively satisfaction to know that in the Pavilion 
itself originated measures which have materially tended 
to promote the better observance of the Sabbath in 
Brighton. ” 

The letter in question from Mr. Sinclair to the Kino- 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO THE KING. 


257 


declining, for the reasons assigned, to accept the invita¬ 
tion given him to dine with his Majesty on Sunday, 
was not only followed, as stated by Lady Colquhoun, 
by another invitation, on the following Monday, from 
his Majesty, to dine at the Pavilion, Brighton, on a 
week day, but his Majesty never afterwards referred to 
the matter in their private conversation. 

Within a day or two after this Mr. Sinclair wrote a 
long letter to King William, vindicating the character 
of those holding evangelical views from the aspersions 
which the King himself had cast upon them, as well as 
others of the Court circle in which Mr. Sinclair was in 
the habit of mingling. This letter presents us with 
another noble exhibition of the high and hallowed moral 
heroism of Mr. Sinclair in his identification of himself 
with those who were held up, in the society in which he 
chiefly moved, to derision and scorn. The following is 
his letter to William the Fourth. The letter, it will be 
observed, is dated from Fulham Palace, Mr. Sinclair 
being on a visit at the time to Dr. Blomfield, the then 
Bishop of London, with whom he was on terms of the 
greatest intimacy. 

Fulham Palace, Jan. 19, 1832. 

Sire, 

I cannot deny to myself the gratification of expressing to your 
Majesty my very humble and cordial acknowledgments for the 
kind and considerate manner in which you were pleased to re¬ 
new, on Monday, that invitation to your presence which, from 
a principle of duty, I had deemed it necessary to decline on the 
preceding day. To one who has so long cherished towards your 
Majesty a sentiment of sincere and disinterested friendship an 
additional proof of regard, though superfluous, must be pleasing, 
—and this instance of forbearance in particular shall never be 
effaced from my grateful remembrance. Emboldened by my 


258 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


unabated confidence in your Majesty’s disposition to honour me 
with a patient hearing, may I presume to put together a few 
sentences on behalf of a certain class of persons, of whom I know 
from frequent conversations on the subject, that your Majesty’s 
opinion is diametrically opposed to mine ? I have, however, if 
I may venture to say so, in this respect no inconsiderable ad¬ 
vantage over your Majesty, because it has been my little-merited 
privilege to associate much during the latter years of my life 
with the persons in question, whereas, I believe, that most of 
them are personally unknown to your Majesty, and that your 
estimate of their character and principles has been chiefly de¬ 
rived from inimical and prejudiced sources. The class of indi¬ 
viduals alluded to has, by the way of reproach and ridicule, been 
denominated “ the Saints.” The strictness of their religious 
opinions, and their abstinence from many of the pursuits and 
amusements of the gay and the fashionable, have drawn upon 
them, in all ages, the most unrelenting and acrimonious hostility 
—a treatment predicted by Scripture, realised by observation, 
and accounted for, as well as foreseen, by Him who “ knew what 
was in man,” and who told His followers, in reference to the 
world, “ If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute 
you.” But what is the line of conduct by which this enmity is 
provoked ? Ho these individuals engage in conspiracies, or aim 
at innovation, or infringe the laws, or distinguish themselves by 
notorious vices ? Ho they frequent the race-course, or patronise 
the gambling-table ? Is their conversation contaminated by pro¬ 
faneness ? Are they reckless of the temporal or spiritual inte¬ 
rests of their fellow-creatures ? Oh, no ! They honour all men ; 
they love the brotherhood ; they fear God ; they honour the 
King. It is by them that the spirit of true religion is kept alive ; 
it is by them that the great doctrines of the Gospel are chiefly 
taught and promulgated ; and if they object to certain habits or 
certain indulgences, it is because they know equally from Scrip¬ 
ture, observation, and experience that these snares have an in¬ 
evitable tendency to harden the heart, to debase the intellect, 
and to extinguish all desire after the unseen realities of heaven. 
They visit the widow and fatherless in their affliction ; they 
exercise self-denial, in order that they may the more abundantly 
jninister to the wants of others ; they have their conversation in 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO THE KING. 


259 


heaven, and look for a city which hath foundations. Oh ! Sire, 
will your Majesty bear with the freedom of my confidence, and 
make allowance for the ardour of my attachment, when I express 
my deep concern at the feelings of alienation with which you 
contemplate those individuals, whom I have feebly attempted to 
describe ? There are no men who pray more frequently for your 
welfare, who are more anxious for the prosperity of your reign 
and the permanence of your house, who do more to stem the 
torrent of infidelity, which menaces to overthrow the institutions 
of our country. They are the persons who visit crime in the 
dungeon, or ignorance in the hovel, who, feeling the value of 
their own souls, are anxiously concerned about those who are 
perishing for lack of knowledge. They do not say, like Cain, 
“ Am I my brother’s keeper ? ” but they come even to their 
enemies as ambassadors of mercy, beseeching them to be recon¬ 
ciled, and to be saved. It is true they are less tenacious than 
others of ceremonies and forms,—that they do not in their pri¬ 
vate devotions think it necessary always to pray from books or 
from memory,—that they do not look with a mistrustful frown 
upon any Christian brother who may not have adopted their 
own views as to Church government, but who has sought and 
found mercy through the same Redeemer. They are, however, 
far from underrating the importance and the blessedness of 
a Church Establishment, although they may, and must, wish 
that its doctrines were preached with greater faithfulness, its dis¬ 
cipline maintained with greater strictness, its chief pastors less 
often advanced from secular motives, and its clergy less con¬ 
formed to the habits and maxims of the world. If I might at 
this moment claim the immediate accomplishment of any wish 
lying nearest to my heart, it would not be for the attainment of 
any personal distinction or advancement; the Searcher of hearts 
knows that it would afford me a far more lively and permanent 
satisfaction to see some of those persons, whom I love and revere, 
—not because of any temporal affinity, but because of a tie which 
eternity shall never dissolve,—permitted to approach your Ma¬ 
jesty’s presence, to enjoy your Majesty’s confidence, and gradually 
to convince your Majesty’s own excellent and upright under¬ 
standing that real godliness is great gain; that in the recognition 
of the Divine Majesty there is great blessedness ; that in the 


2C0 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


morning and evening exercise of family devotion there is great 
recompense of reward ; that for the relinquishment of worldly 
indulgence there is an ample indemnity ; that the tears of joy 
and the expressions of thankfulness, which such a course would 
elicit from the most respectable, and, in the best sense, most 
enlightened, of your subjects, would draw down from on high a 
blessing both upon yourself and upon your Government, and 
contribute to the revival of those genuine sentiments of piety 
which, as I humbly conceive, can alone save the country from 
destruction. 

Sire, I deeply feel the magnitude, both of my p resumption and 
of my own unworthiness. Who am I, that I should venture to 
bring this subject under your Majesty’s consideration ? and yet 
I feel a necessity laid upon me to be thus respectfully explicit. 
I myself once despised those whom I am now most desirous to 
resemble. I myself once shunned that society which I now find 
most edifying and congenial. I myself was once “ a blasphemer, 
a persecutor, and injurious,” walking according to the course of 
this world, and having my affections engrossed by “seen and 
temporal ” objects. Nay, such is the melancholy perverseness 
even of a heart which has been renewed, that, with watch¬ 
fulness (alas ! too often remitted) with prayer (alas ! too often 
lifeless and formal), I might still relapse into any sin, or 
still be ungrateful for any mercy. My languid and uncertain 
state of health often warns me, that I am but a “ stranger 
and pilgrim ” here. M}" years, and months, and even days, may 
be but few; and though sometimes cheered by the pursuits of 
science,—sometimes charmed by the attractions of literature,— 
sometimes animated by the converse of social friendship,—some¬ 
times soothed by the sympathy of Christian love,—the experi¬ 
ence of every day reminds me that “ all is vanity.” But there 
is One whose name is love,—One to whom all power is given in 
heaven and earth,—One who bestows a peace very different from 
that of the world,—One who pours balm into the wounded con¬ 
science,—One who kindly invigorates the drooping spirits of the 
weary. It is from a sense of duty and gratitude towards Him , 
and from the devoted attachment which I cherish towards your 
Majesty, that I have presumed to pourtray, though very inade¬ 
quately, the feelings and the principles of those on whom the 


LETTER FROM MR. SINCLAIR TO THE KING. 


261 


world bestows, for the sake of disparagement and derision, the 
very name which, in the sacred writings, is conferred, as the 
highest title of honour, upon those whom God has loved with an 
everlasting love, and who shall hereafter chant his praises 
throughout ages of endless felicity. With the most ardent 
wishes for your Majesty’s happiness, both in the present and 
in the better world, and with a most grateful sense and lively 
recollection of all the personal kindness with which it has pleased 
your Majesty to honour me, I ever remain, your Majesty’s most 
respectful and affectionately-devoted subject and servant, 

George Sinclair. 

The following is another letter to King William the 
Fourth from Sir George. It is on the critical condition 
of the country at the time it was written, which was on 
the 12th of May, 1832. 

Sire, 

I have for some days hesitated as to the propriety of venturing 
to address your Majesty at the present crisis; but it appears to 
me, that to remain silent, after a friendship and correspondence 
of sixteen years, would be, on my part, a dereliction of duty, even 
if your Majesty should disapprove of the step which I under¬ 
take, or of the sentiments which I shall presume to express. 

It is my firm conviction, Sire, that the country is at present in 
a state of imminent and almost unprecedented peril. The great 
majority of the middling and working classes are roused to the 
highest pitch of discontent and disappointment ; a willing ear 
is ever lent to the invectives of every demagogue ; and the 
principles of loyalty towards the throne, and attachment towards 
the Sovereign, are shaken to the very centre. One act only is 
wanting to make the cup of national resentment run over. The 
appointment of a minister who, if consistent, is, of all enemies 
to reform, the most implacable, and, if conceding, is, of all apos¬ 
tates, the most time-serving and inexcusable, would do more to 
lower the character of public men,—more to endanger the royal 
authority,—more to encourage political profligacy and abandon¬ 
ment of principles,—than it is possible to exaggerate or to con¬ 
ceive. In his hands concession is deprived of all its grace, and 


262 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


of all its efficacy. The people are generous, reflecting, and just. 
They would rather take less from Lord Grey than obtain more 
through the party which has undermined and supplanted him. 
But what would have satisfied them from the hands of Lord Grey 
will not be deemed sufficient, if it emanates from the “ Enemies’ 
Camp.” The bill would be received with feelings of sullen ac¬ 
quiescence, or as a stepping-stone to ulterior objects, instead of 
being hailed with lively gratitude, as the basis of good govern¬ 
ment and national independence. And what can be done with, 
and what without, the House of Commons ? Not one of Lord 
Grey’s supporters will be base enough to abandon him ; they 
cling to him in the season of adversity (if adversity it can be 
called) with even more lively ardour than they supported him 
in the hour of his greatness. I myself, who never so much as 
interchanged with him a sentence of common civility,—I, who 
have been often frowned at for occasional votes against the ad¬ 
ministration, and who had no personal favours, either to expect 
or to be grateful for,—must honestly avow, that I consider my¬ 
self bound, by every tie of honour and every dictate of principle, 
to adhere to him in this emergency. Would a dissolution be safe 
or practicable at the present moment ? Would the people desert 
the candidates who have spent their strength in the people’s 
cause ? Would not a national ferment be excited in every corner 
of the Empire ? Would not Ireland be convulsed, Scotland agi¬ 
tated, England everywhere a scene of discord, and, in many parts, 
of bloodshed ? Oh ! Sire, I tremble to think of the scenes which 
may cloud the evening of your days. My heart is daily wounded 
by the expressions which everywhere ring in my ears, in refer¬ 
ence to recent proceedings. Names are now pronounced with 
indignation which, till of late, were identified with national 
gratitude and universal respect, A fearful reaction is, indeed, 
taking place ; and what is to be the result ? An odious ministry 
will be unable to maintain its ground. The man to whom 
the British people looks up with undiminished confidence will, 
perhaps, be recalled when it is too late, and when the concessions 
now offered will no longer satisfy the nation. Should Parliament 
be dissolved, I myself shall retire to private life, carrying with 
me the consolation of having, to the best of my judgment, been 
actuated, in my parliamentary career, by patriotic and conscien- 


SIR GEORGE’S FIDELITY TO HIS RELIGIOUS PRINCIPLES. 263 


tious motives, and anxiously hoping that the evils may be averted 
by a gracious Providence, -which I believe are now impending 
over the country, and which nothing could, in my opinion, have 
averted, but the recall of those ministers who possess the confi¬ 
dence and esteem of the people, 

I have the honour to be, 

Your Majesty’s most obedient servant, 

George Sinclair. 

• 

No one can read this letter without being profoundly 
impressed with Sir George’s sympathy with the suffer¬ 
ing classes, mingled with moral courage which he 
displays in so earnestly and explicitly bringing their 
deplorable destitution and utter inability to help them¬ 
selves, before the Sovereign. In this respect, I believe 
Sir George had no fellow-workers. He stood alone in 
the mission which he had appointed for himself,—a 
mission which he fulfilled with all that faithfulness and 
self-sacrifice which were shown in relation to everything 
he ever undertook. He was prepared to risk the loss of 
his Sovereign’s friendship in his consuming devotion to 
the cause of those who were suffering privations of which 
persons moving in the higher spheres of life could form 
no conception. The favours of the Court, in other words, 
were deemed by Sir George as less than dust in the 
balance compared with his doing all that in him lay to 
lessen the sufferings and diminish the sorrows of the lower 
classes of the community. Had the alternative been 
placed before him,—“ Either cease to interest yourself in 
the miseries of the masses, or forfeit the friendship of 
your Sovereign,” Sir George would not have hesitated a 
moment as to the choice he would make. He would 
have said, “ Much as I love and reverence my Sovereign, 
highly as I esteem his friendship, 1 am prepared to 




2G4 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


submit to the loss of his Majesty’s favour rather than 
cease to feel for and seek to ameliorate the condition of 
those in the lower classes who are plunged in the depths 
of destitution and distress.” 

But this is a point to which I shall have occasion to 
recur when I come to speak of Sir George in the more 

private relations of life. 

« 

In the meantime suffice it to say, that neither the 
letter I have given above, jDleading so eloquently and 
earnestly the cause of those in the humbler walks of life 
who were sunk in the lowest depths of distress, nor the 
sympathy which he expressed for them, nor the efforts he 
made in Parliament or elsewhere to ameliorate their con¬ 
dition,—forfeited the friendship of William the Fourth. 
That friendship he continued to enjoy, with one single 
and temporary intermission, till the close of the Sove¬ 
reign’s life. The temporary loss of the royal favour arose 
from a cause which was in no way connected with the 
interest which Sir George felt and manifested in the deep 
distress of the working classes. The displeasure which 
King William temporarily showed towards the subject of 
these Memoirs had its origin in the circumstance of his 
having become chairman of a Society which had been 
formed in Scotland for the purpose of procuring the 
repeal of a law which then existed, which gave patrons of 
livings in the Church of Scotland the right of appointing 
as parish ministers any persons they thought fit, however 
much they might be deemed unfit by the parishioners for 
the office of ministers of the Gospel. Even if their lives 
were notoriously immoral, they could, by what was called 
the law of patronage, be thrust on the congregations. Nor, 
under any circumstances, however objectionable might 



THE KING AND SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 


265 


be the doctrines, as well as inconsistent with the spirit 
and precepts of Christianity might be the conduct and 
conversation in the world, of these ministers, could they 
be removed from their livings in the Church of Scotland. 
The association to which I have alluded, and which was 
called “ The Anti-Patronage Society,” was formed for 
the purpose of obtaining a reversal of this state of 
things, by giving congregations the power, by a veto on 
the appointments made by patrons, of preventing, on 
sufficient reasons being given, the intrusion of objection¬ 
able ministers. As the parties possessing this power 
of nominating to vacant livings any persons they pleased, 
provided they had been duly licensed to preach by the 
Presbytery of their respective places of residence, were 
almost exclusively noblemen, or members of noble fami¬ 
lies, King William was wrought upon by these patrons, and 
he warmly expressed his displeasure at the establishment 
of the Society, of which Sir George Sinclair had become 
the president or chairman. For some time he showed his 
displeasure by not inviting Sir George to St. James’s or 
Windsor Castle; and on one occasion he expressed his 
indignation at Sir George’s having become the head of 
“ The Anti-Patronage Society,” in a way which was at 
variance with all the recognised rules of good breeding. 
He invited Lady Camilla Sinclair and Miss Sinclair, Sir 
George’s wife and daughter, to dine at the Palace, and 
did not invite Sir George. Preferring, however, in this, 
as in every other case, the approval of his conscience to 
the friendship of man, he cheerfully submitted to the 
slight which he had received from the Sovereign. But 
estrangement of the King was not of long duration. 
He soon became reconciled to the person of Sir George, 


2GG 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


however much he may still have felt displeased with 
the course he had pursued in the instance in question. 
The intimacy of the two became as great as it ever 
had been, and so continued till AVilliam the Fourth 
came to that “ last scene of all ” which, sooner or 
later, will be the inevitable destiny of the whole human 
race. 

I ought not here to omit to mention that the Duchess 
of Clarence, on becoming Queen Adelaide, continued to 
show the same friendship towards Lady Camilla Sinclair 
as she had uniformly done during their prolonged inti¬ 
macy before she had become the Queen Consort. They 
largely corresponded together, and Lady Camilla was 
frequently a visitor at St. James’s and AVindsor Castle. 
There were, indeed, but few ladies not holding official 
positions at the Court of Queen Adelaide, for whom her 
Majesty cherished a more sincere regard than she did for 
Lady Camilla. And that attachment underwent neither 
diminution nor variation until the time of the Queen 
Consort’s death. 


CHAPTER XII. 


The Part which Sir George Sinclair took in the Scottish Non-Intrusion Ques¬ 
tion—His Letter to Lord Aberdeen on the Subject—Is Assailed for 
Remaining in the National Church after the Disruption—Ultimately 
Joins the Free Church of Scotland—Suggests and Advocates a Union 
between the Free Church and United Presbyterians. 

I have alluded in the preceding chapter to the fact 
that the only misunderstanding—and it was but of 
temporary duration—that ever took place between Wil¬ 
liam the Fourth and Sir George Sinclair had its origin 
in the circumstance of the latter having become chair¬ 
man of the Anti-Patronage Society. The movement 
initiated by that Society in 1834 against the intrusion of 
unpopular ministers into parish churches in Scotland soon 
acquired colossal proportions, and continued to increase in 
power until it eventually culminated in the disruption of 
the Scottish Ecclesiastical Establishment, by the secession, 
in 1843, of about 500 out of the 1200 clergymen con¬ 
stituting the ministry of the National Church of Scotland. 
Sir George Sinclair took a deep interest in the continued 
progress of this great movement, which in 1838 received 
a mighty impetus from the fact of a very unpopular 
minister having been intruded into the parish church of 
Auchterarder, in Perthshire, and the case being brought 
before the law courts of Scotland. The point which had 
to be decided by the Court of Session, the principal 



268 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

legal tribunal on the other side of the Tweed, was as to 
the relative jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts of the 
Scotch National Church, and the civil courts. The Pres¬ 
byteries, the Synods, and the General Assembly, all con¬ 
curred with the parishioners of the parish of Auditeiaider 
in their opposition to the intrusion of the minister 
alluded to, on the church in question. The case was 
eventually decided in favour of the superior juris¬ 
diction of the civil courts in the point at issue. An 
appeal from the decision of the Scottish Courts was made 
to the House of Lords, and the latter tribunal affirmed 
the judgment of the Court below. It would be impos¬ 
sible to convey any adequate idea of the intensity of the 
interest taken by the people of Scotland in this case 
during the four years and upwards that it was before the 
legal tribunals of the land. But probably there was no 
one on the other side of the Tweed who felt a deeper 
interest in the question than Sir George Sinclair. 
Assuredly no one laboured more assiduously or more 
earnestly than he did to arrest that disruption of the 
Scottish Establishment which was then dreaded, and 
which eventually took place. He sought to bring about 
a compromise between the extreme Non-Intrusionists or 
Anti-Patronage party on the one side, and those on the 
other who sought either to maintain the law of patronage 
as it then stood, or would only consent to certain modi¬ 
fications in that law which, by the great bulk of the 
people of Scotland belonging to the National Church, 
were regarded as no better than a mere mockery. The 
question was brought by Sir George Sinclair before Sir 
Robert Peel, then Prime Minister, and Sir James 
Graham, then Home Secretary ; and a rather lengthened 


THE NON-INTRUSION QUESTION. 


269 


correspondence took place on the subject between these 
two Ministers of State and the subject of these Memoirs. 
Lord Aberdeen, then Foreign Secretary, also took a deep 
interest in the matter; and as all these statesmen were 
intimate personal friends of Sir George, the Scotch 
people s side of the question was represented and advo¬ 
cated by him, not only with the greatest ability, but 
under circumstances of the most advantageous kind. 
Neither of the three statesmen, however, whose names I 
have mentioned, would make such concessions as would 
satisfy the majority of the members of the National 
Church north of the Tweed. Sir George pointed out to 
them that the inevitable result of their refusing to 
concede to the people of Scotland the right of choosing 
their own ministers, and their exemption from the 
jurisdiction of the civil courts in things purely eccle¬ 
siastical, would be a disruption of the Scottish Establish¬ 
ment by the secession of a very large number of the best 
of the clergy, followed by the great majority of their 
people. But they would not believe it. Still Sir George 
continued his earnest efforts to prevail on the statesmen 
alluded to, to come to terms with the Non-Intrusionists. 
With that view he carried on an extensive correspondence, 
not with those statesmen only, but with all the leading 
men on either side of the question. To say nothing of 
letters from all quarters,—written by statesmen and by 
the most influential Presbyterian clergymen and laymen 
of the day, which have been lost,—I have as many letters 
and papers on the subject lying before me as would make 
a goodly volume. The amount of labour and the degree 
of anxiety which Sir George Sinclair underwent in 
his zealous and unremitting efforts to obtain for the 



270 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


people of Scotland what lie regarded as their rights 
in this matter, will never be known. Deeply im¬ 
pressed with the importance of the crisis, and fearing 
the immediate disruption of the Church of Scotland, Sir 
George resolved to make one last great effort to open 
the eyes of the Peel Government to the gravity of 
ecclesiastical matters on the other side of the Tweed. 
With that view he wrote a long and very able 
letter on the subject to the Earl of Aberdeen. The 
fact of Lord Aberdeen being a Scotchman, and there¬ 
fore having naturally a fuller comprehension of the 
question than any of the English members of the Cabinet 
could be expected to have,—was the principal reason why 
Sir George addressed his letter to him. The letter is so 
ample in its information, and so luminous in its facts in 
relation to the question on which he wrote, that persons 
unacquainted with that question will at once understand 
it by a perusal of the document, which is as follows :— 

Brighton, April 25th, 1843. 

My dear Lord Aberdeen, 

The friendly, consistent, and patriotic course which you have 
pursued in reference to the settlement of the Scottish Church 
question, as well as the unwavering confidence which you have 
reposed in the rectitude of my intentions, not only command 
my liveliest gratitude, but will, I trust, justify me in publicly, 
and for the last time, addressing to you a few remarks on the 
present state of the controversy—remarks which I wish to be 
considered both by yourself and by those who take an interest 
in a subject of such overwhelming, but in too many quarters 
inadequately appreciated, importance. 

As long as the exact period at which the crisis must take 
place appeared to be somewhat vague and indefinite, nay, perhaps 
remote, or altogether problematical, its consequences seemed less 
awful and less appalling even to those who were most im¬ 
pressed with alarm and anxiety. But now that Providence 




LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO LORD ABERDEEN. 271 


“ limiteth a certain day”—now that we know with precision 
during what week, or even up to what hour, an adjustment may 
be practicable, and at what moment every hope must expire for 
ever—that on the 18th of May, unless a timely interposition 
prevent such a calamity, many, at least of our oldest incumbents 
(how many I cannot tell, but too many be they ever so few) will 
cease to belong to that Church of which they are not only the 
children but the champions, it is surely the duty of every friend 
to Scotland’s happiness, to Scotland’s peace, and to Scotland’s 
morality, to look the danger in the face, and see whether it be 
still possible to ward it off. 

There are two points which seem to be very generally taken 
for granted : lstly, that the secession will be comparatively in¬ 
considerable ; and 2ndly, that it can no longer be averted. On 
the first of these topics I do not pretend to speak with accuracy, 
as the accounts which I receive are perplexing and contradic¬ 
tory. My own conviction, however, is, that the amount will, 
even in a mere arithmetical point of view, be large; and although 
no one deprecated or disapproved of the Convocation more than 
I did, I believe that most of the ministers who countenanced 
its proceedings will concur in leaving the Church, unless such a 
settlement be forthwith proposed as they can with a safe con¬ 
science adhere to. But even if many should be induced to 
retrace their steps, and await the appearance of a Government 
measure, subsequently to the meeting of the Assembly, I am 
persuaded that the most pious of their parishioners will, in that 
case, cease to be their .hearers. Supposing, however, the seces¬ 
sion to be numerically small, is this the only standard by which 
its importance ought to be determined ? Does not a traveller 
experience a greater loss whose pocket is picked of a purse con¬ 
taining 100 sovereigns, than if he were robbed of a more bulky 
bag, in which 1000 farthings were contained ? Whatever may 
be said to the contrary, I contend that, even if only 100 minis¬ 
ters retire, they will not leave the same number of equally able, 
faithful, popular, and useful teachers within the pale of the Church 
in which so many hundreds of their brethren may still continue 
to labour. There are, indeed, some sanguine politicians who 
seem to hail the prospect of the impending schism as an aus¬ 
picious occasion for “ weeding ” the Establishment. Alas ! such 


272 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


“ weeding ” will resemble the infatuation of the gardener who 
cut down his finest vines and apple trees in order that the sloes 
and brambles might have ample room to vegetate and to expand. 
The loss of that great and good man, Dr. Chalmers, is even, 
when considered by itself, as deplorable as it would prove irre¬ 
parable, and will carry with it a moral weight throughout Scot¬ 
land, which cannot be too highly estimated. You have no doubt 
heard of the Highland chief, who, when desired to occupy an 
inferior place at the festive board, exclaimed, “ Wherever Mac¬ 
donald sits, that is the head of the table.” With still greater 
truth may it be said on this occasion, “ Wherever Thomas Chal¬ 
mers is, there is the Church of Scotland! ”—not indeed the 
Church of Scotland’s statutes—of Scotland’s aristocracy—of 
Scotland’s landed proprietors—but the Church of Scotland’s 
people—of Scotland’s influential and middling classes—of Scot¬ 
land’s pious peasantry—the centre of their hopes, their confi¬ 
dence, their love, their veneration ; and thus the jDresent Church 
will cease to be national, although it will continue to be estab¬ 
lished. I at once admit that my illustrious (I grieve that I 
must no longer enjoy the privilege of adding “ friend,” but it is 
an honour even to say) “ countryman,” has not, in my humble 
judgment, any adequate grounds for leaving that Church in 
which I myself (who am no Convocationist) shall deem it my 
duty to remain, in the confident hope that the Government, of 
which you are so distinguished a member, will ere long intro¬ 
duce a satisfactory bill. And if the Cabinet brings forward a 
specific measure, on such a basis as I have so frequently recom¬ 
mended, and of which so many of the non-intrusion leaders at 
one time approved, I must, indeed, under any circumstances, 
witness with the deepest sorrow so lamentable a catastrophe. 
But if, I say, the Government shall have fairly propounded a 
bill, involving the utmost limit to which concession can, in their 
judgment, be carried, recognising the relevancy of the objection, 
if urged expressly on the part of the parishioners, that the mi¬ 
nistrations of the presentee will not, in their conscientious 
opinion, be edifying—placing the quoad sacra question on a 
basis acceptable to the Church, and acknowledging her inde¬ 
pendence in matters purely spiritual, then, indeed, in the highly 
improbable event of such an offer being rejected, I shall feel 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO LORD ABERDEEN. 273 


quite satisfied with the wisdom and the kindness of the Cabinet, 
and cast the entire blame upon the Church’s unreasonableness and 
infatuation. I trust, however, my dear Lord, that her Majesty’s 
Government will carry their generosity and forbearance towards 
the Church as far as principle and conscience will allow. What¬ 
ever concessions they may make will never be regarded as time¬ 
serving or derogatory; whereas it is already but too evident, 
from the tone of unseemly levity and insulting harshness 
adopted in many quarters, that every departure from their de¬ 
mands adopted by the clergy is hailed, on the part of worldlings, 
who watch for their halting, as an indication of selfishness and 
timidity. 

I now proceed to consider the second proposition, and to ask 
whether it is impossible to prevent any schism from taking 
place at all ? Can it be so, when the parties are, in fact, so near 
in points of agreement ? Can it be so, in the face of Dr. M‘Far- 
lan’s admirable letter; the pacific resolutions of the Synod of 
Glasgow ; the calm, able, dignified communications of my excel¬ 
lent friend Lord Breadalbane; the abandonment by the Church 
of the claim that the Act of Anne should be repealed; the ac¬ 
knowledgment by the State of the Church’s supremacy in things 
spiritual; the declaration of so many Convocationists, that the 
Veto is not essential; the alarm, the horror expressed on all 
hands at the prospect of disruption ? Permit me to suggest one 
more expedient—Let the Cabinet summon Drs. Chalmers, 
Welsh, and Gordon to London, and have an amicable conference 
with these distinguished men—let each party act with perfect 
frankness—let all the bearings and branches of the question be 
fully and dispassionately gone into—and I should entertain a 
most sanguine hope, that, when the Church has explained her 
minimum and the State its maximum, all difficulties might be 
removed, and peace, through God’s blessing, be restored— 
scarcely, indeed, at the eleventh hour, but when twelve was just 
about to strike. 

There is one more very important point, on which I wish to 
make a few observations. So far as patronage is concerned, there 
is no longer any doubt or difficulty ; its continuance is regarded by 
you as indispensable—by me as admissible—by you with appro¬ 
bation—by me with acquiescence. We also concur in disliking the 


274 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Veto, as affording an uncontrolled scope to the occasional exer¬ 
cise of caprice, vindictiveness, or injustice, although I myself 
would rather submit to the possible or even probable hardships 
which might in individual cases arise from affixing a legal sanc¬ 
tion to that principle, than encounter the hazard, or, I may say, 
the certainty of impairing the usefulness and destroying the 
popularity of the Church. 

The only question remaining is one which is abundantly 
simple and intelligible. Taking it for granted that the parish¬ 
ioners are, in the case of each appointment of a minister, to 
occupy the place of objectors, and no other, what are the 
reasons in opposition to the settlement which they shall be 
entitled to urge, and on which the Church courts shall be en¬ 
titled to pronounce a judicial and final deliverance ? On this 
subject it is of the utmost moment that we should at once 
arrive at a clear understanding. There is a very numerous class 
of objections, some of which I have often seen quoted as in¬ 
stances of the powers proposed to be conferred upon the Pres¬ 
bytery, the mention of which has always excited in my mind 
a feeling of dissatisfaction, or, rather, of repugnance. Do we 
not trifle with the feelings of the people when we gravely confer 
on them a barren right to adduce objections which are too frivo¬ 
lous and absurd to enter their minds at all, or the occurrence of 
which will be so rare as not to be worth consideration for a 
single moment ? Let any one point out, if he can, two parishes 
in Scotland in which the most ignorant or prejudiced hearers 
would care whether the name of their minister was Macleod or 
Macpherson, Macsycophant or Macsarcasm. Where are the 
parishioners to be found who would attach importance to 
the colour of their pastor’s hair; or who would object to 
him because he squinted, or was lame, or because he did or did 
not wear a wig ? The fact is, that the only objection likely to 
be often urged, or seriously entertained, is the one which was 
stated by Dr. Gordon, and of which I never for a moment 
doubted the relevancy, under the basis of agreement in 1841— 
namely, that “ in the conscientious opinions of the objectors, 
the ministrations of the presentee are not calculated to edify 
themselves, their families, or the congregation.” Of such para¬ 
mount importance is this consideration, that it would be better 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO LORD ABERDEEN. 275 


to allow such an objection, and to debar the power of alleging 
any other, than to give the most unrestricted right to prefer 
every other conceivable reason against the settlement, and hold 
that single objection to be invalid or illegal. I need scarcely 
add, that the Church courts would, of course, have in each case 
as indisputable an authority to overrule as to sustain it. I must 
own that I was not a little surprised, and I may add alarmed, 
when I perceived that, whilst allusion was made, during the de¬ 
bate in the House of Lords, to many reasons of very minor in¬ 
terest or importance, this objection was passed over in silence, 
without allowing the relevancy of which you are conceding little 
more than nothing to the Church courts and to the people. It 
is true that there may be instances in which “ a weak voice ” 
may operate as a serious disadvantage in the case of a spacious 
place of worship; but I maintain that there is scarcely a parish 
in Scotland in which a decided and general preference would not 
be given to a preacher with a comparatively feeble voice, who 
“ declared the whole counsel of God ” in the language of simple 
and affectionate faithfulness ; to another who, in tones the most 
pleasing or the most sonorous, proclaimed the doctrines of the 
standard of our Church more coldly or more imperfectly. 

I am fully aware how often it is denounced as a gross and 
glaring absurdity, that parishioners should be permitted either 
to choose their own pastor,'or to object to the settlement of a 
presentee on the ground that they are not edified by his preach¬ 
ing. As to the safety and advisableness of conceding to them 
the former of these privileges I shall not say a single word; my 
own opinion on that subject has long been before the public, but 
I find that submission to patronage is the price which the 
Church must be content to pay for endowment. I am, however, 
astonished to hear that the propriety of granting even the latter 
and subordinate right is in many quarters denied ; and that it is 
thought as preposterous as it would be to allow schoolboys to sit 
in judgment upon the qualifications of their teacher. But in the 
first place, is not the patron himself a pupil as well as the mem¬ 
bers of the congregation ? And is he always amongst the pupils 
the most conscientious and the best informed ? Does he not 
frequently belong to an entirely different school, and undervalue 
or neglect both the lessons and instructions connected with the 


27C 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


seminary where it is contended that his fiat should be paramount 
and uncontrolled ? I was once assured by a patron that he made 
it a rule never to appoint a presentee without having himself 
heard him preach; but as I had reason to believe that he had 
never read the Confession of Faith, and could not have answered 
one question in the Shorter Catechism, I derived little comfort 
and the parishioners little benefit from his strict adherence to 
that very plausible rule. It is not enough that a man be scru¬ 
pulous in acting according to his opinion, unless he is also quali¬ 
fied to form one correctly by information and experience. I 
have known patrons who were better mythologists than theolo¬ 
gians, more conversant with the reveries of Plato than familiar 
with the writings of St. Paul, and some who were equally 
strangers to both. There are others who regard as fanatical the 
preaching which would be characterised as faithful by the pious 
cottage patriarch of a Highland glen, and would give a most 
conscientious preference to Blair over Boston, or to Robertson 
over Rutherford ; whilst there is not a rural congregation 
throughout the length and breadth of Scotland would de¬ 
rive either consolation or refreshment from the polished and 
elaborate, but meagre and defective, lucubrations of those frigid 
and philosophic divines whom the patron would delight to 
honour. Again, supposing that some nobleman sat in judgment 
on such an occasion, whose mind was unhappily tainted with the 
leprous distilment of the semi-Popish Tractarian heresy, would 
he not at once withdraw his favour from any true and fearless 
champion of Presbyterian Protestantism, who denounced the 
uncharitable figment of apostolic succession as understood and 
inculcated at Oxford, and called upon his hearers to be on their 
guard against the insidious but too successful encroachments of 
that soul-destroying system which their fathers resisted unto 
blood ? Whilst, therefore, it is conceded, that be the character 
and church worship of the patron what they may, he shall pos¬ 
sess the unchallenged right of the initiative in every appoint¬ 
ment of a parochial incumbent, yet, as in so many instances, and 
from so many considerations, he may possibly select such a pro¬ 
bationer as maybe least acceptable to the parishioners, let them 
be invested with the privilege of objecting, on the ground of 
non-edification, before the proper tribunal, whenever they think 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO LORD ABERDEEN. 277 


fit to do so. I repeat that there is no analogy between the 
exercise of such a power, and the imparting to the scholars at 
a seminary the right of choosing their teachers. There are 
in every congregation, not only “little children” and “young 
men,” but “ fathers,” who, “ by reason of age have their senses 
exercised, to discern both good and evil,” who, in reference to the 
great truths of the gospel, “ already know them, and are estab¬ 
lished in the fullest truth,” and who are therefore perfectly com¬ 
petent, and I humbly think entitled, to form a candid and con¬ 
scientious opinion, whether the presentee is capable of “ doing 
all things for their edifying,” and of teaching acceptably and 
effectually the doctrines of free grace to their children, to the 
“ ignorant, and to them that are out of the way.” The right of 
at least having this objection considered by the Presbytery is 
far more generally prized by the most respectable portion of our 
Scottish population, than you yourself, my dear Lord, seem to 
believe, and is of far greater importance to them than to their 
English fellow-Christians, in whose case the deficiencies of the 
pastor are amply atoned for through the medium of the aid 
afforded by the liturgy. You will, I think, ere long, discover 
that it is rather a fallacious criterion to estimate the intensely 
national feeling in Scotland on this subject by the absence of all 
non-intrusion manifestations, when my friend Sir R. Peel and 
you attended her Majesty during her auspicious visit to Scot¬ 
land. The men who take an interest in this question, are not 
likely to follow royal processions— 

“As stupid starers, and with loud huzzas.” 

But still less would their strong religious feelings, and respectful 
bearing towards those in authority, permit them to assail the 
Queen’s confidential advisers, especially when in attendance on 
her Majesty’s person, with rash or rude clamour, even in regard 
to those public objects to which they attached the highest im¬ 
portance. I cannot help fearing, my dear Lord, that amongst 
those who leave the Church, we shall find enrolled a large pro¬ 
portion of our best and holiest ministers, attended by most of 
their holiest and best parishioners ; and when the disruption has 
once taken place, my belief is that there will be vestigia nulla 
retrorsum; few if any will return to the Establishment, but 
many of those who may remain for a time connected with it 


278 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


will, probably, ere long, pass over to the “Free Church, there 
is also every reason to apprehend that even those who carry with 
them into the bosom of their new communion a lingering attach¬ 
ment to the Church, from which they reluctantly separate, may 
ere long become indifferent, or even hostile, to its prosperity or 
continuance. Thus it has been with the descendants of the 
seceders of 1733, who, although their predecessors continued 
firmly attached to the principle of an Established Church, are 
now, at least in a very great majority of instances, the vehement 
advocates of Voluntaryism. I do not attempt to palliate or dis¬ 
guise the errors and imprudence of the excellent men whose 
secession I am so anxious to prevent. I still deplore the meet¬ 
ing of a self-constituted convocation, which took place in spite 
of my most earnest reclamations and reiterated remonstrances. 
I still condemn the subsequent invasion, by many of its mem¬ 
bers, of parishes with which they had no concern, and the 
strong exciting language addressed to public meetings. But I 
can now only think of the evils—the lamentable evils—which 
their retirement will occasion throughout the land. I hear the 
rumbling of this moral earthquake, by which the goodly edifice 
of our venerated Church may be shaken to its very foundations, 
many of our city and village places of worship deserted, which 
is almost worse than destroyed, and the wooden churches inade¬ 
quately providing accommodation for the multitudes who throng 
to attend on the ministrations of the pastors whom they love 
and confide in. 

I have often in imagination contemplated, as a scene of sad 
and solemn interest, the departure of a minister’s widow with 
her children from the manse in which she long took sweet 
counsel, and was associated in labours of love with the partner 
whose loss she is deploring. Methinks I see them for the last 
time crossing the threshold endeared and sanctified by a thou¬ 
sand reminiscences, and attended at the door of the carriage which 
is to bear them to some strange and distant abode, by the grave 
and grey-headed elders whom they have so long respected, and 
the forlorn and helpless mendicants whom they have so often 
relieved. Alas! is not the day at hand in which hundreds of 
manses will at once be forsaken by their present useful and 
happy inmates, where the hand of death has not torn the 


THE DISRUPTION OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. 279 


affectionate husband from the circle of his domestic felicity, but 
from whence he will repair with his family at the stern call of 
duty, to a more straitened dwelling, with a scantier income— 
cheerfully submitting to all their own privations, but mourning 
over the necessity of diminishing their wonted amount of bene¬ 
factions to the alleviation of suffering indigence, and the diffu¬ 
sion of Divine truth throughout the world ? Oh ! my dear Lord, 
let me implore your colleagues and yourself to make one attempt 
more to prevent this awful catastrophe. 

If you can save the Church from disruption by the immediate 
introduction of a measure founded on a generous and enlight¬ 
ened basis, do not be deterred from the effort by equivocal or 
uncertain assurances that the secession will not be numerous. 
Remember the example of Him whose clemency remained 
unabated, although the amount of good men likely to be found 
within the precincts of a city appeared to be more and more 
diminishing. “ I will not do it for forty’s sake—I will not do it 
if I find thirty there—I will not destroy it for twenty’s sake—I 
will not destroy it for ten’s sake.” You, indeed, are not engaged 
in the “strange and unhallowed” work of destruction; but it is 
your highest duty, and would I know be your greatest happi¬ 
ness, to prevent it, and I therefore, in conclusion, for the last 
time, most earnestly and most respectfully entreat you to say, 
with respect to this impending calamity of schism, “ I will do 
what I can to avert it, if it be only for ten’s sake.” 

Believe me to remain, with much regard and esteem, my 
dear Lord Aberdeen, most faithfully and cordially yours, 

George Sinclair. 

The event which Sir George had so clearly foreseen, 
and so frequently foretold as the inevitable consequence 
of refusing to the ministers and members of the Scottish 
Establishment what they claimed, occurred at last. In 
June, 1843, the House of Lords, as I have before men¬ 
tioned, confirmed the judgment of the Court of Session, 
which denied the validity of the claims of the Non- 
Intrusionists. Immediately afterwards the leading 
Non-Intrusion clergy—consisting, I ought to remark, 


280 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


exclusively of those holding evangelical views,—met in 
Edinburgh to decide on the course which they ought to 
adopt in consequence of the adverse decision of the House 
of Lords,—to which assembly, as the court of last resort, 
they had appealed. They prayerfully deliberated on the 
position in which the Church of Scotland had been 
placed by that judgment, and asked the Divine direc¬ 
tion as to the course which they ought now to take. 
Their deliberations were solemn, and the decision to 
which they came displayed a marvellous unanimity, 
considering the great personal sacrifices which it would 
necessarily involve. Of these they were fully aware; 
but they felt that they were bearing testimony to 
the great Scriptural truth, that the Lord Jesus alone 
is the Head of the Church, and rather than prove 
unfaithful in their adherence to that momentous truth, 
they preferred suffering the loss-of all things. Nearly 
one-half of the clergy of the Church of Scotland, headed 
by Dr. Chalmers, and including well-nigh all the most 
popular preachers in that Church, withdrew simulta¬ 
neously from the Scottish Establishment, giving up their 
glebes as well as their incomes, or stipends as they are 
called in Scotland, and throwing themselves and their 
wives and families on the good providence of God, for 
their further support. Nor in thus trusting in Divine 
Providence were they disappointed. Money came in 
from all quarters to enable them to build new places of 
worship ; and they trusted to the voluntary contributions 
of their new congregations for their own and their 
families’ support in years to come. The great majority 
of their congregations—in some instances nineteen-twen¬ 
tieths—quitted the Establishment with them, and from 



SIR G. SINCLAIR’S VIEWS ON CHURCH ESTABLISHMENTS. 281 

that time to this, now a full quarter of a century, they 
have been liberally supported by their respective congre¬ 
gations. I cannot speak with the confidence of absolute 
certainty, but I believe I am correct when I say that the 
minimum amount of a Free Church ministers income is 
£150 per annum, while the more popular preachers 
among them, in our populous towns, have salaries vary¬ 
ing from £500 to £800. The latter sum has just been 
given to the Eev. Mr. Dykes, Free Church minister in 
the Scotch Church, Regent’s Square, London, — the 
Church of which the late Rev. Dr. James Hamilton was 
the minister for upwards of a quarter of a century, a 
Church which was originally built for the Rev. Edward 
Irving, and in which he preached to overflowing audi¬ 
ences until lie adopted certain heretical views, which are 
well known to all who are acquainted with the varied 
phases which modern theology has assumed. 

As Sir George Sinclair had taken the warmest interest 
in the Anti-Patronage Movement, including, I repeat, 
almost every evangelical minister in the Church of 
Scotland, it was fully and universally expected that he 
would secede from the National Establishment when so 
many of the clergy did. But he did not; and because 
he felt it to be his duty to remain, he was fiercely as¬ 
sailed by many of the Free Church partizans as being 
unfaithful to his principles, and inconsistent in his con¬ 
duct. All the great services which he had rendered to 
their cause—at personal sacrifices, the number and great¬ 
ness of which none but himself could know—w^ere forgot¬ 
ten. I will not here, because it is not necessary I should, 
express any opinion either in favour of or against religious 
establishments. My views on that subject are not un- 




282 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


known. They have been so fully and frequently ex¬ 
pressed in other quarters, that all those who know 
anything of my writings are intimately acquainted with 
my sentiments relative to ecclesiastical establishments. 
Sir George Sinclair’s reply to those who assailed him 
because he did not at once quit the Scotch Establishment 
and join the Free Church, was, that notwithstanding all 
the flagrant abuses which had characterised the Esta¬ 
blished Church of Scotland and other national Churches, 
he was in favour of the principle of religious establish¬ 
ments, because he thought they were indispensably 
necessary to the maintenance of religion in the country. 
It is but doing justice to the memory of Sir George to 
state that at the time he held this principle, all the 
leading men who seceded from the national Church of 
Scotland were just as firmly attached to the principle of 
religious establishments as he was. They all came out 
with distinct and emphatic repudiations of the idea of their 
having become Voluntaries. So far from that, they, on the 
contrary, expressed their hope that in the course of time 
religion in Scotland would be so far freed from the 
jurisdiction of the Civil Courts that they would be able 
to return to the Establishment; or, in other words, that 
their Free Church would become an established religion 

O 

by the State. In connection with this phase of the Free 
Church question, I may state that for several months 
after the disruption of the Church of Scotland, a series of 
deputations of the most eminent of the seceded ministers 
were in the habit of coming to London to obtain an 
approval of the course they had adopted, on the part of 
the evangelical dissenting denominations in England. 
And not the approval only, but their aid in the erection 


FREE CHURCH CLERGY AND VOLUNTARY PRINCIPLES. 283 

of new churches in Scotland. As I took a deep interest 
in what preceded and followed the disruption, I was in 
the habit of meeting with these deputations of Free 
Church ministers from the other side of the Tweed; and 
I remember just as well as if the incident had occurred 
so late as yesterday, that on walking down one day from 
Exeter Hall to Fleet Street, with Hr. Candlish, the 
recognised Free Church leader, and the late Hr. Tweedie, 
the former expressed to me his great regret that the 
Hissenters of England seemed to have the idea that they 
—the Free Church ministers—had left the Church of 
Scotland because they had become Voluntaries,—in other 
words, had renounced the principle of religious establish¬ 
ments. “This,” said Hr. Candlish, with emphasis, “is a 
great mistake. We are all as much in favour of the 
principle of religious establishments as we ever were,-—- 
only there is no existing establishment sufficiently pure 
for us to approve. They are all corrupt in conse¬ 
quence of their submission to the interference of the 
State in matters purely spiritual, and which are therefore 
within the province of the Ecclesiastical Courts alone.” 
Hr. Candlish added that, with all its faults, he looked 
on the Church which they had left as the best of existing 
establishments. In answer to this, I simply asked 
whether he ever expected to meet before the millennium 
with an Established Church so pure as that he could 
conscientiously and heartily join it ? His reply was in 
the negative. I then observed that I thought it would 
be better to adjourn the consideration of the question 
till the advent of the millennium ; and that, in the mean¬ 
time, as the members of the Free Church were practi¬ 
cally as much Voluntaries as the Hissenters of England 




284 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


whose sympathy and support their deputations from 
Scotland came to London to solicit, it would be as well 
not to feel in the least annoyed at being called Volun¬ 
taries. I am sure that Dr. Candlish will perfectly 
remember this conversation between him and myself, 
and that he will indorse the substantial accuracy of the 
account which I have given of it. 

The only difference, therefore, between Sir George 
Sinclair and the Free Church on the question of esta¬ 
blishments, was that he believing, just as they did, that the 
principle of religious establishments was Scriptural, still 
continued practically to assert that principle by remain¬ 
ing in the national Church ; whereas they put the prin¬ 
ciple in abeyance by coming out of the Establishment. As 
he conscientiously believed that a national, or established 
Church, was necessary for the maintenance of the Chris¬ 
tian religion in a country, he acted in accordance with 
that view. It was unjust, therefore, to blame him for 
the course he adopted. The thing that they would have 
been justified in doing would have been to endeavour to 
convince him that his opinion was wrong, not to condemn 
him for acting in accordance with his convictions. 

But though, as has been shown, Sir George Sinclair 
remained for some years in the Established Church, he 
was not inattentive to what he witnessed of the progress 
of the Free Church, and of the deadness and disastrous 
consequences to vital religion which characterised the 
national religion on the loss of nearly all her most able, 
most spiritual, and most devoted ministers. The result 
of his careful, prayerful, and conscientious deliberations 
on this altered state of things was, that he saw it to be 
his duty to quit the Established and join the Free 


SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR JOINS THE FREE CHURCH. 


2S5 


Church. The announcement of this step on the part of 
Sir George caused a great sensation in Scotland. It 
was first made in the following letter to the Editor of 
The Witness, the organ of the Free Church, and at 
that time conducted by the late Hugh Miller,—one of 
the most remarkable men, all things considered, that 
either Scotland or any other country ever produced. 

LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART., TO THE EDITOR 

OF “ THE WITNESS.” 

Thurso Castle, April 26th, 1851. 

Dear Sir, 

As I had occasion in former times to take a prominent part 
in the ecclesiastical concerns of Scotland (though I have of late 
been living in seclusion and obscurity), I request that you will 
concede to me as large a space in your columns as may enable 
me to announce that I have been induced, after much prayerful 
deliberation, to relinquish my connection with the Establish¬ 
ment, and seek admission within the pale of the Free Church. 

I shall not at present attempt to enter into a full statement 
of the grounds on which I have been led to come to this resolu¬ 
tion. Suffice it to say, that I had the honour to be invited to 
become a member of a most respectable society, formed for the 
purpose of assisting the Established Church in opposing any 
legislative enactment which may appear to militate against her 
rights and interests, and for aiding her ministers, especially 
those in rural districts, when they incur expense or difficulty, in 
such cases as involve public principle. As, however, I consider 
that any legislative enactments which would be resisted by the 
Established Church are become just and necessary, in conse¬ 
quence of her altered position since the disruption, and as I 
entirely disapprove of the eviction of respectable and crowded 
congregations from chapels erected chiefly at their own expense, 
or from funds to which those who left the Church contributed 
the largest proportion, I felt that it was incumbent upon me to 
decline to belong to this institution; and I also arrived,—though, 
I must admit, with reluctance,—at the conclusion, that, as I am 
unable to act in matters of such grave importance with the most 



28G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


respectable and influential office-bearers of tbe Establishment, 
it is more becoming in me to retire from its communion than to 
remain a reluctant spectator of proceedings for which, as a mem¬ 
ber of the Church, I might be, to a certain extent, held respon¬ 
sible, but which my heart and conscience condemn. 

I cannot deny that I experience in my solitude (for I am living 
at present quite alone) no ordinary feelings of depression and 
anxiety. It is very painful to sever a tie which has subsisted 
during so long a course of years, and which I was so desirous to 
have maintained unbroken; and instead of being cheered by the 
co-operation and sympathy of such valued and high-minded 
brethren as were those who quitted the Establishment in 1843, 
I take this decided and important step without one companion 
or adviser. But I am sustained by the conviction, that I am 
animated by no selfish feeling, and that I have sought and, I 
humbly trust, found, the guidance and approval of One whose 
wisdom cannot err, and whose faithfulness cannot fail. 

Believe me to remain, dear Sir, 

Yours faithfully, 

George Sinclair. 

Subjoined to this letter from Sir George Sinclair, 
relative to his secession from the Established religion of 
Scotland, and liis joining the Free Church, there was the 
following article, which there can be no doubt was the 
production of Hugh Miller’s own pen :— 

SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S LETTER. 

Sir George Sinclair must have pre-imagined the shout of 
contumely and opprobrium which extreme partisans would, in 
all likelihood, be provoked by the step he has taken to send 
after him; beyond this, and far more irksome to think of, he 
must have pondered the conclusion to which the considerate 
and lenient of those whose company he has forsaken would be 
guided. Neither prospect was pleasant to contemplate. To 
hear the yell of violent reproach sounding on one’s track ; much 
more to be borne down by the sorrowful consciousness that one 
is reputed, in appearance not unjustifiably—fickle, vacillating, 
without any solid phase of character, the subject of unmasked 



“ THE WITNESS ” ON SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S LETTER. 287 


and contradictory volitions, and that this estimate is entertained 
even by those whom he esteems and reverences, is a condition 
so galling and unwelcome that most men would shrink from 
facing it, and be rendered very jealous indeed how they incurred 
or gave occasion for such an opinion. In any case, it is no easy 
matter to do what is seen to be right, and brave all hazards; in 
the present instance, an accumulation and extraordinary increase 
of obstacles had to be surmounted. It would have been tenfold 
less hard and trying a task for Sir George, giving himself up to 
be animated and sustained by the enthusiasm then prevalent, 
to have come out at the disruption ; the ties which he had now 
to snap asunder, in addition to their native force, were bound 
more tight by just the amount of power which he had then exer¬ 
cised in holding himself back, and in overcoming the impulse 
which prompted to their rending. That he should not have 
been scared from his purpose by these enhanced difficulties, but 
on the contrary, has been enabled manfully to encounter them, 
attests most eloquently the worth of the principle implicated, 
and the depth of his convictions respecting it; and thus it hap¬ 
pens that the very act which even some of those who do look at 
other than the outside of things may be inclined to regard as 
but a fresh proof of inconsistency and weakness, becomes a heroic 
righting of himself. 

It is very probable that will not be gathered from the letter 
in which Sir George announces his resolution of quitting the 
Establishment. The impression most likely to be produced by 
its perusal is a sense of the inadequacy of the reasons therein 
contained, to justify the decision intimated. The letter, taken 
by itself, however, is, we apprehend, no statement of the grounds 
on which the determination it announces is based; indeed, so 
much is explicitly avowed. But, from the epistles addressed 
some time ago to Dr. James Robertson, taken in conjunction 
with the previous history of the author, a reflection is flashed 
on the enigma, by the light of which its meaning may be read. 
Those letters, as coming from the correspondent of Dr. M/Crie, the 
chairman of the Anti-Patronage Society, the President at the 
commemoration of the second century of the second Reforma¬ 
tion, we remember reading with a curious sort of psychological 
interest. They had much of the novelty and indescribable 


288 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


charm which belongs to “ Confession.” By them it was made 
plain that the amiable and accomplished writer had let go no 
principle he ever held—that it was the struggle to maintain 
principles authority had pronounced incompatible, which kept 
him in the place he was,—and that where his principles were, 
his affections abode also. What more significant and unmis- 
takeable could there be than the following passage ?—“ When 
the disruption unhappily took place, the principle that religion 
can never flourish in any country without an established church 
was so deeply engraven on my heart and conscience that I was 
unable to follow the example of the individuals I most revered 
and confided in, and remained an adherent of the Church, when 
almost every one with whom I had acted through life considered 
it their duty to leave it.” 

The same spirit is here again exemplified :—“ I have been 
often taxed with inconsistency in reference to Church matters, 
but my conscience acquits me of the charge, for the necessity of 
maintaining an ecclesiastical establishment is the principle to 
which I have through life adhered with unwavering fidelity, 
even when from time to time contending for certain modifica¬ 
tions in the constitution of our National Church, which I thought 
calculated to render it more generally acceptable, as well as to 
ensure its stability.” 

Nor was that spirit of recent origin. It breaks out manifestly 
in a letter addressed by him so far back as 1824 to the Historian 
of Knox, in which he proposes the preliminary arrangements 
for the consideration of a union between the Original Seceders 
and the Establishment. In it he says:—“ Having imbibed 
from my father a sincere and cordial attachment to our National 
Church, I have often contemplated with deep regret the lament¬ 
able schisms by which her peace and unity have been rent, and 
it is a subject of surprise to me—as well as sorrow, that no 
endeavours have been lately made to heal the breaches in our 
Zion, and cause us to be of one accord and one mind.” 

It is evident, indeed, that this attachment was with him, as 
he himself acknowledges, almost a superstitious feeling;—that 
he assigned to its object, apart from all else, an exaggerated im¬ 
portance, but that for some time he-has been hampered in his 
position, and found himself the victim of a mental discomfort 


JOINING THE FREE CHURCH. 


280 


and disquietude. Here is the commencement of the last letter 
to Dr. Robertson, perhaps the most outspoken passage the whole 
series contains :— 

“ Believe me, it is no easy matter, even for the sake of adher¬ 
ing to a great principle, to resist the evidence of one’s senses, to 
repress the conviction of one’s understanding, or restrain the 
feelings of one’s heart. When we hear such exclusive import¬ 
ance attached to the efforts of an institution which, so far as 
ocular demonstration is concerned, does so little in our own 
district for the furtherance of pure religion, we are inclined to 
exclaim, in the emphatic language of my late admirable friend 
Wilberforce (Life, vol. i., p. 844), * Surely if the friends of the 
Establishment set themselves thus against all plans for the 
benefit of mankind, which do not square with their own narrow 
scheme, the public will not be long in discovering that they are 
a nuisance. The conclusion is obvious. Is there no Gamaliel 
to remind them that if the work be of God they cannot over¬ 
throw it, but may possibly, in the attempt, make that which 
they mean to support the very foundation ? ’ ” 

These views, calmly and deliberately surveyed, have become 
more vivid and impressive, until at length they have produced 
their natural result. With a good heart the estimable, con¬ 
scientious, and highly accomplished man, to whom they were 
presented, has relinquished what at last he found he could not 
retain without sacrificing what was more valuable; and we 
rejoice at the fidelity to his principles, and the scrupulous sense 
of right, he has had the courage to assert. 

For a considerable time after it became known that 

Sir George Sinclair had left the Established and joined 

the Free Church, the circumstance was the sole subject 

of conversation among those who belonged to the various 

religious denominations of Scotland. On the part of the 

adherents of the Establishment, he was, as might be 

expected, assailed in the most vehement manner ; while 

on the part of the friends of the Free Church he was 

eulogised in the highest degree, and his accession hailed 

u 


290 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

as one of tlie greatest honours and advantages which 
could have been received by their Church. 

Within a few years after Sir George had joined the 
Free Church, he brought before the people of Scotland a 
proposal for a union between the several denominations 
of Presbyterians in that country holding evangelical 
principles. There were at the time some few Presby¬ 
terian sects, small in number, whose doctrinal sentiments 
were the same as those of the Free Church and the 
United Presbyterians, but they held some peculiar 
notions with regard to church government, which kept 
them separate from the latter two great bodies. The 
union which Sir George proposed to accomplish had special 
reference to an amalgamation between the Free Church 
and the United Presbyterians. These two great denomi¬ 
nations entertain the same views on all the leading 
doctrinal questions contained in the Scriptures, and their 
forms of worship are precisely identical. The only thing 
on which there is the slightest difference between them 
relates to the question of religious establishments. At 
first, as has been already stated, when the disruption in 
the National Church of Scotland took place, the seceders 
came out avowing their adherence as firmly as ever to 
the principle of religious establishments ; but, since then 
-—a quarter of a century having in the interval passed 
away—a large number of the Free Church ministers have 
relinquished the principle of religious establishments, 
and become Voluntaries. But that principle, when Sir 
George brought forward his scheme for a union of the 
Free Church and the United Presbyterian bodies, was 
found to be so great an obstacle to the proposed amal¬ 
gamation—the United Presbyterians being Voluntaries 


THE FREE CHURCH AND UNITED PRESBYTERIANS. 


291 


to a man—that after writing many able letters on the 
subject, and attending many meetings with the leading 
men of both denominations, lie was constrained to give 
up the idea, not as one of hopeless realisation, but as 
one which there was no immediate prospect of carrying 
into effect. For a time, therefore, Sir George was obliged 
to relinquish the active prosecution of an object which 
lay very near his heart, and in favour of which he had 
written and spoken so largely and eloquently. 

But of late years the idea of a union between the two 
great Presbyterian bodies in Scotland has come again to 
the surface, and committees of the best and ablest men 
in both denominations have been diligently at work for 
full four years in endeavouring to bring about an amal¬ 
gamation of the Free Church and the United Presby¬ 
terian body. Something like a basis of union has been 
laid, and at intervals it has looked as if it would, 
before long, become an accomplished fact. One great 
hindrance—perhaps I ought to say, the greatest hin¬ 
drance of all—is being rapidly removed, by the progress 
which voluntaryism is making among the Free Church 
ministers. Still there are obstacles which have to be 
got out of the way, and the probability is that no in¬ 
considerable period will elapse before the desire of Sir 
George Sinclair's heart, while alive, will become a great 
historical fact. This much, in the mean time, is due to 
the memory of Sir George to say,—that to him alone 
belongs the honour of having first proposed a union 
between the Free Church and the United Presbyterian 
bodies. 




CHAPTER XIII. 


Sir George joins, in 1835, the New Party of Lord Stanley and Sir James Gra¬ 
ham—His Reasons for taking that Step, as given by Himself—His Last 
Speeches in the House of Commons before Retiring from Parliament—His 
Reasons for Retiring. 

The year 1835 was one of considerable interest in the 
political career of Sir George Sinclair. In that year his 
views on various points underwent a considerable change. 
On the great question of parliamentary reform, which 
still continued largely to occupy public attention, his 
opinions experienced a somewhat important modification. 
Chartism was making rapid progress among the masses 
of the community, and he feared, as many others did 
who had supported the Reform Bill of 1832, that if the 
extreme opinions which that word expressed were not 
discountenanced, the results to the country might be very 
serious. Many, indeed, feared an attempt at a social revo¬ 
lution from the spread of Chartist principles, in that and 
the intervening years until 1839, when the failure of the 
great metropolitan Chartist demonstration caused a com¬ 
plete collapse of the Six Points' agitation. 

Entertaining the views to which I have adverted, Sir 
George Sinclair joined, in 1835, those who had seceded 
in the previous year from the Government of Earl Grey, 
namely, the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Ripon, Lord 
Stanley (the late Earl of Derby) and Sir James Graham. 


THE NEW PARTY IN PARLIAMENT. 


293 


These members of the Grey Government seceded from it 
on the ground that they could not, in accordance with 
their convictions, concur with that Government in some 
of its measures. They deemed them too largely im¬ 
pregnated with the Liberal element. And as, after the 
lapse of a few months, Sir George Sinclair, finding that 
his views on political questions generally, more nearly 
approximated those of the ex-members of Lord Grey’s 
Cabinet, he openly joined the party which they had in 
the interim formed for themselves. This, as I have before 
mentioned, was in 1835, the Grey Government having, in 
the previous year, been broken up, and succeeded by 
the Melbourne Administration. Soon after the seceders 
from Lord Grey’s Cabinet had formed the new party, 
they received large accessions both from Moderate 
Liberals and Liberal Tories. This was to be expected 
with two such able representatives of the new combi¬ 
nation in the House of Commons as Lord Stanley and 
Sir James Graham. 

Sir George Sinclair having formally joined the new 
party, which was a sort of intermediate one between the 
extreme Tories and the ultra Liberals, felt it to be a 
duty, which he owed alike to the country and to himself, 
to explain and vindicate the reasons why he had with¬ 
drawn from those Liberals with whom he had hitherto 
chiefly acted. This he did in his place in Parliament. 
But long afterwards he drew up a paper, in which he 
entered at length into the considerations which had 
weighed with him in bringing about a change of his 
political opinions, and a corresponding change of political 
conduct. As the document is drawn up with Sir George’s 
usual ability, and may be said, in a sense, to possess a 


294 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


historic interest, I will, instead of giving a summary of 
its contents, subjoin it entire. It was written by Sir 
George in the year 1866. 

During the long and arduous discussions upon the Reform 
Bill, Sir George Sinclair witnessed with high and unqualified 
admiration the inexhaustible energy and unrivalled acuteness 
displayed by Lord Stanley, to which, as Mr. Disraeli has 
recently observed, the success which attended that measure 
may in a great measure be ascribed. Some time thereafter it 
was unexpectedly announced that Lord Stanley and Sir James 
Graham had resigned their offices in the Whig Cabinet. Sir 
George Sinclair was one of the few supporters of that adminis¬ 
tration who entirely approved of the line of conduct which 
these two distinguished statesmen adopted, and he took an 
opportunity of publicly expressing in the House his conviction 
that the Government had been much weakened by their 
secession, and that it now resembled a ray from which two of 
the prismatic colours had been withdrawn, in consequence of 
which it only exhibited a feeble and flickering light. Parlia¬ 
ment was soon afterwards dissolved; Sir Robert Peel was 
authorised to form a new ministry. Sir George Sinclair enjoyed 
the fullest confidence of his constituents ; they even carried 
their regard and approval so far, that when some of his friends 
had repaired as far as Strathpeffer, where he was arrested on his 
journey by severe indisposition, they, on seeing his weak and 
precarious state of health, resolved to dispense with his pro¬ 
secuting his journey, and agreed on his unanimous re-election 
during his absence. It was to Sir George a subject of serious 
consideration how he ought at such a crisis to act. Like his 
most dear and intimate friend Sir Francis Burdett, to whom he 
paid a daily visit and with whom he dined several times a 
week, he had been not a little surprised and scandalised by the 
gigantic selfishness and unblushing nepotism which marked the 
whole career of the Whig administration, as well as by the 
habit which they invariably indulged of answering any ob¬ 
jections urged against any measure and especially against any 
job, “ If you oppose this measure you will endanger the success 
of the bill.” Whilst labouring under these strong impressions, 


HIS REASONS FOR JOINING- THE NEW PARTY IN 1835. 


295 


the tidings reached Sir George that the Whigs, in the full 
malignity of their rage and disappointment at their dismissal, 
had resolved to oppose the re-election of Mr. Manners Sutton as 
speaker, and to put Mr. Abercromby in his place. Sir George 
considered that he could not, as an honest and independent 
Member of Parliament, countenance so flagrant an act of 
vindictiveness and injustice. Mr. Manners Sutton had no 
strong personal claims upon Sir George Sinclair’s favour. 
When Sir George Sinclair had to bring forward a motion on 
the subject of the Scotch Church, and the members who had 
taken a part in a j^’eceding debate were, after a division, 
hurrying in crowds and rather slowly out of the House, the 
Speaker on the very commencement of the rush called upon 
Sir George to address the House, and when Sir George respect¬ 
fully remonstrated, and begged that a delay might be granted 
until the retiring members were gone, the Speaker insisted on 
his proceeding immediately, for otherwise he would call on the 
member next on the list to proceed. Sir George was thus 
compelled to address the House under circumstances of peculiar 
disadvantage. Notwithstanding this slight and several others, 
Sir George resolved to stand by himself. If Sir George had 
gone at first to St. James’s Place (as he at one time intended), 
with the letter of which an extract is given, pledging Sir 
Francis Burdett to vote for Mr. Manners Sutton, Sir George has 
little doubt that Sir Francis would have accompanied him to 
the House; and a speech from Sir Francis in favour of Mr. 
Manners Sutton might probably have turned the scale. Mr. 
Tracy had hinted rather triumphantly to Sir George that he 
need not be looking for Sir Francis, and Sir George proposed to 
Mr. Holmes to take a cab and drive to St. James’s Place, if Mr. 
Holmes would promise to get the debate prolonged to hi s 
return. But Mr. Holmes believed that the debate would 
terminate sooner, so Sir George remained and voted for Mr. 
Manners Sutton. This one act raised the fury of the entire 
Radical press in Scotland against Sir George. He was at once 
denounced in the Great Northern Star, and called upon to 
resign his seat. A number of his best friends in Caithness at 
once turned against him, and set up an opposition candidate 
against Sir George preparatory to the next election. When 



29G MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Sir George showed all these malignant squibs and satiies to Sii 
Francis, he shook his head, and said, “Well, Sinclaii, I wish I 
had done as you did, if I had been ten times as much abused as 
you have been.” The following letter was wiitten by Lord 
Stanley to Sir George Sinclair on the 2nd of February, 1835 

Dear Sir, 

I should feel much gratified if you would have the kindness 
to call here immediately after the delivery of the King s speech 
to-morrow in the House of Lords, in order that we may have 
the opportunity of consulting as to the course which it may be 
expedient for us to pursue. May I further trespass on your 
kindness to say to Sir Andrew Agnew, Mr. Hardy, and Mr. 
Plumptre, if you feel at liberty to do so, that if they will also 
favour me with their attendance, it will give me much pleasure 
to see them, though I could not presume on my slight ac¬ 
quaintance with them to take the liberty of inviting them 
myself. 

Believe me, &c., 

Stanley. 

Sir George continued during the remainder of the Session to 
be a cordial supporter of Lord Stanley’s, and a constant attender 
of every meeting convened at his house. When Sir Robert 
Peel resigned, an influential member of the Whig party said to 
Sir George, “ Well, Sinclair, you did wrong, but there is still a 
door open if you wish to come back to us.” The temptation 
was great. Had Sir George publicly declared that he had given 
the Peel Ministry a fair trial, and as they had been unable to 
conduct public affairs, would no longer oppose the Whig ad¬ 
ministration, his own seat might have been secured for life. 
But he remained firm, and, thanking his friend for the con¬ 
siderate offer, assured him that “ he had taken his stand, and 
was determined to adhere to it.” The friend shrugged up his 
shoulders, and took a silent leave. When the dissolution took 
place in 1837, Sir George was re-elected after a sharp contest, 
which never would have taken place if he had adhered in 1834 
to the Whig administration, and the following very friendly 
letter was addressed to him by Lord Stanley from Dunrobin, 
August 20, 1837 :— 


LETTERS FROM LORD STANLEY, LATE LORD DERBY. 


297 


My dear Sinclair, 

I received your kind letter on my arrival here last night, and 
had I time at my disposal, few things would have given me 
more pleasure than to have searched you out in your extreme 
nook and availed myself of your valuable assistance as a 
lioniser, but, unluckily, my time is limited by engagements in 
Lancashire which I cannot postpone, and almost every day of 
my stay in Scotland is set out. I can only stay at this place 
till the end of the week, and then I am under a promise to the 
Duke of Richmond at Gordon Castle. This press of time has 
compelled me to decline an invitation which I should otherwise 
most willingly have accepted, to attend the public dinner which 
I find that your constituents are to give you on Wednesday 
next; but being only just arrived here on a visit of a week, I 
thought it would hardly be civil to my hostess to take two days 
out of the middle of it for a public dinner. I rejoiced un- 
feignedly in your success, respecting which I had some 
anxieties. 

The following letter from Knowsley was received a few 
months later:— 

December 25, 1837. 

My dear Sinclair, 

You have omitted in your letter to say on what day you and 
Sir Francis Burdett have accepted the invitation to dine at 
Stockport with the Conservative operatives, and as I am known 
always to refuse such invitations, I am not likely to hear the 
day from other quarters. I am therefore unable to say, as this 
is a time of year when we are going about a great deal from 
house to house, whether either my father or myself would be 
likely to be at home to receive you. 

In little more than a fortnight I conclude we shall all have 
to go up to town in consequence of the short adjournment, but 
if you will let me know when your dinner is fixed, I will write 
to say if it will be in our j^ower to see you in case you should 
think it worth while to come so far out of your way, as we are 
about thirty-five miles from Stockport. 

Believe me, very sincerely yours, 

Stanley. 

During the remainder of that Parliament, Sir George gave 


298 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


all the help he could to Lord Stanley, and at the beginning of 
its final Session he received the following letter :— 

2nd January, 1841. 

My dear Sinclair, 

I was sorry to learn from Freemantle, the only person I have 
seen since I came to town three days ago, that you had again 
been very unwell, though he added that you still talked of 
coming up for the meeting of Parliament. I have no idea what 
is likely to take place, but should think that if you could get a 
good pair for the first fortnight, at all events, it might save 
you a long and cold journey. Still I am far from wishing to 
damp your ardour, and should be very sorry you should be 
absent without a pair. We shall meet, in point of numbers, a 
degree better than last year, &c. 

A letter dated January 18tli, 1841, returns thanks for infor¬ 
mation on the subject of a lease of the Langwell Moors in 
Caithness, after which is as follows :— 

Let me have a line to say you have received my letter safely, 
and also if you have a pair for the opening of the session, or 
mean to come up. Do not attempt what you are unequal to, 
but do not run the risk in one way or another of losing us a 
vote, where votes may be worth their weight in gold. 

Ever yours sincerely, &c. 

At the close of the Session Sir George was overwhelmed with 
illness and fatigue, a coalition of the Whigs and Radicals de¬ 
feated him at Halifax, and the exertions of the Caithness Libe¬ 
rals, who never forgave Sir George Sinclair’s adherence to Lord 
Stanley, rendered him equally unsuccessful in the north. A 
heart-rending domestic calamity induced Sir George to seclude 
himself from public life, and almost from social intercourse; 
during six years and ten months ; he never slept out of his own 
house during that period, but his friendly correspondence with 
Lord Stanley still continued. When Lord Stanley withdrew his 
support from Sir Robert Peel, on account of his apostasy on the 
Corn Law question, Sir George received the following answer in 
reply to a letter of congratulation on that subject, May 13th, 
1847 


CLOSE OF SIR GEORGE’S PARLIAMENTARY CAREER. 299 
My dear Sir George, 

If I omitted to answer your former letter, pray ascribe it to 
any cause ratlier than that of displeasure at receiving the kind 
expression of your approval, and of your generally friendly feel¬ 
ings. I cannot say that if I were far more anxious for office 
than I am, the present state of the country is such as to hold 
out any strong inducement. I am sorry you cannot give a 
better report of yourself, and however little you may be able to 
stand much of turmoil, 1 cannot think the very solitary life you 
describe yourself as leading can be favourable either to spirits 
or health. We anticipate a general election in July. Will the 
din of it reach your remote region ? Is there any chance of 
your ousting your present representative ? 

Believe me to be, dear Sir George, 

Yours sincerely, 

Stanley. 

Such was the termination of Sir George’s political career, 
prior to which, however, he had the honour and happiness to 
act as chairman of the Westminster Election Committee, by 
which, after a laborious contest, Sir Francis Burdett was tri¬ 
umphantly returned, an event which was considered as highly 
beneficial to the cause of Conservatism. Sir George’s long se¬ 
clusion suspended of course for a time all personal intercourse 
with his political friends, and all attendance in the Court. A 
quarter of a century has elapsed since his retirement from public 
life, many changes have taken place in the political world, 
and he has at last lived to witness the reinstatement of Lord 
Derby to that position of which Sir George Sinclair, ever since 
1835, had deemed him sufficiently worthy, and in endeavouring 
to accomplish his elevation to the highest position had sacri¬ 
ficed his seat in Parliament, and incurred much vexation and 
obloquy. 

We are now approaching the period when Sir George 
Sinclairs parliamentary career was drawing to a close. 
That he should have resolved on retiring so early from 
legislative life was all the more regretted because his 


300 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


speeches, down till the last one he made in the House, 
showed not only that he took as lively an interest as ever 
in the great engrossing questions of the day, hut that his 
mind was as vigorous, and his eloquence of as high an 
order, as at any previous period of his prolonged parlia¬ 
mentary career. Among the latest of his great speeches, 
which electrified the House of Commons, was one which 
was delivered on the 20th of May, 1840,—the last session 
hut one he sat in the representative branch of the Legis¬ 
lature. The subject before the House was a Bill for im- 

« 

proving parliamentary legislation in Ireland, brought in 
by Lord Stanley, afterwards Lord Derby, who died in 
October last. Sir George gave his most strenuous sup¬ 
port to the measure. After ably advocating its leading 
provisions in detail, he proceeded to make some obser¬ 
vations on the state of Ireland, and in doing so, he made 
the pseudo-patriots, among barristers and other profes¬ 
sional men, with whom Ireland abounded at the time, 
writhe under his sarcasm, his wit, and his humour. The 
degrading subjugation to Mr. O’Connell and the other 
leaders of the then Repeal Movement in which the mass 
of the Irish people were held, was a theme on which Sir 
George expatiated at considerable length, amidst the 
laughter and applause of the House. 

The following extract from this speech of Sir George 
will be now read with an enjoyment little less than that 
with which it was listened to in the House of Commons 
nearly thirty years ago. 

It was impossible on such an occasion to avoid making a few 
comments upon the present state of Ireland, which so often 
afforded to her Majesty’s ministers and their adherents a theme 
for triumph and gratulation. Ireland, they were told, is tran¬ 
quil, but so was an army completely equipped for battle ; the 



HIS SPEECH ON IRELAND, JN 1840. 


301 


Oommandei in Chief gives the word to “ stand at ease,” 
although they are prepared to obey him with still greater 
alacrity when he orders them to “ make ready, present, and 
tire.” Had not Father Maguire himself, the accredited Popish 
champion in all polemical conflicts, openly proclaimed that he 
himself and nine-tenths of his sacerdotal coadjutors are resolved 
to bring their respective contingents of teetotallers into the field, 
if a line of policy should be adopted which does not meet with 
their sanction and approval ? Ireland was only quiet because 
the so-called popular party are allowed to have everything their 
own way—because their hands are filled and their mouths are 
stopped by an unexampled and most rigidly enforced monopoly 
of the favour and influence of the Crown. He once read some¬ 
where of an Indian Nabob, who boasted not only that he had 
succeeded in taming a hyena, which had long been the dread 
and terror of the neighbourhood, but that he had achieved this 
object by a simple expedient. “ All that I did,” said he, “ was 
to cause a very large supply of garbage to be deposited every 
morning at a respectful distance from his den, and to forbid all 
my subjects, under pain of incurring my displeasure, to intrude 
upon his haunts, or interfere with his habits.” “ But, Sir, 
pray what would happen if your highness’s daily tribute of 
carrion should be withdrawn ? ” “ Oh, he would, no doubt, in 

that case, be found as savage and untractable as ever.” And 
so would the Irish j^atriots if the current of promotion and 
patronage were to flow in an opposite direction. At present 
they are literally drenched with golden and most copious 
showers of honours and emoluments. It never rained but it 
poured. There never was such an alarming mortality among 
bishops, judges, and public servants of every class and descrip¬ 
tion, as since the accession of her Majesty’s ministers. One 
could never take up any Irish paper, and more especially the 
Post or the Pilot, without finding the earliest intimation that 
some meritorious functionary had been dropping off, and some 
lucrative office dropping in. All the Liberal peers either were, 
or intended to be, enrolled among the Bibbonmen, and although 
upon every vacancy in any department, “ methinks there are 
six Richmonds in the field ” to supply it, the unsuccessful can¬ 
didates consoled themselves by not only reflecting that, accord- 


302 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


ing to the old adage, “ All is not lost that a friend gets,” but by 
cherishing a confident hope that their turn may come next, for 
it was quite certain that, whilst the present government con¬ 
tinues in office, the most incompetent Whig would in every in¬ 
stance obtain the preference over the most distinguished and 
best qualified Conservative competitor. But he must here 
notice another anomaly in the present state of Ireland—the 
state of galling slavery and degrading responsibility to which 
many of its representatives are reduced. The hon. member 
for Dublin seemed to have established a sort of political papacy 
in his own person. All the members whose return his influence 
had contributed to j^romote, must look up to him as the keeper 
of their consciences, and surrender the right of private judg¬ 
ment. If they presumed to disobey his mandates, they must 
hold up their hands, and submit to be arraigned before his 
tribunal; the offence was, in a political sense, a capital one :— 

“ Off with his head—so much for Brahazon.”* 

And two other hon. and gallant friends of his would also 
have been cashiered or ordered for execution, if they had not 
pleaded guilty, and been strongly recommended to mercy. 
Oh, when would Irish gentlemen shake off this ignominious 
bondage and cease to lick the dust at a self-installed dic¬ 
tator’s feet \ They were, no doubt, “ all honourable men,” 
as well as honourable members, and independent men too, 
but with two somewhat stringent limitations, namely, that they 
must never vote in opposition to the wishes of the learned 
member for Dublin, or even presume to act upon the modest 
pezzo termino principle of non liquet, by absenting themselves 
from any division. But her Majesty’s ministers are sunk into 
the same state of abject dependence upon the same absolute 
authority. It may be fairly inferred, from the speech of the 
Secretary for the Colonies, that the hon. member for Dublin 
had ceased to be his own trumpeter, and that the functions 
of that high office had devolved upon the noble lord. They 
were aware that their enjoyment of place on this side of the 
water can only be co-existent with the continuance of his power 
upon the other. They seemed to have furnished him with a 
letter of licence to say and do whatever he pleases without 


HIS SPEECH ON IRELAND, IN 1840. 


,303 


responsibility or restraint. He expressed his determination to 
devote all the energies of his mind to the furtherance of an 
object which they themselves had declared to be equivalent to 
the dismemberment of the empire ; and what did the Prime 
Minister say to this % Why he strove to get rid of the subject, 
by assuming a tone of unstatesman like poco cur ante -ism and 
ill-timed jocularity, and scarcely ventured to go so far as to 

“ Just Lint a fault, and hesitate dislike.” 

But this matter was too serious to be trifled with. The poet 
told us that, in the case of merit, it is possible to “ damn with 
faint praise and he (Sir G. Sinclair) would presume to add 
that, in the case of misconduct, it is easy to encourage by feeble 
disapprobation. He questioned whether any of her Majesty’s 
ministers in this house would indignantly notice, on the 
present occasion, the recent attempts to excite agitation and 
organise resistance in Ireland; but he told them that, if they 
did not, “ cum tacent clamant ,” and that they criminally sanc¬ 
tioned such proceedings if they shrunk from the duty of con¬ 
demning them. There was, however, after all, one point of view 
in which, perhaps, their conduct is defensible. They might, 
perhaps, concur in the opinions entertained by ninety-nine per¬ 
sons out of every hundred in reference to the epistles and 
orations of the honourable member for Dublin—that all his pro¬ 
mises are fudge—that all his menaces are moonshine. He (Sir 
G. Sinclair) scarcely thought that he himself would stand up 
and declare in this House that he either expected or wished to 
effect the repeal of the union. He could not deny that it was 
merely a worn out and weather beaten stalking-horse, which 
even the Irish public was by this time quite sick of seeing so 
often paraded before them. He was informed that the honourable 
member had lately invented a repeal button. (Mr. O’Connell 
pointed to his buttons.) It seemed to be a very apt and 
significant emblem of the degree in which he cared for the 
question. In fact, it was universally admitted that the war- 
whoop, or rather sham-fight wIioojd, of repeal was now altogether 
at a discount; that it had ceased either to stimulate the enthu¬ 
siast, or to terrify the alarmist, even throughout the various 
districts in Ireland in which the proclamations of the honourable 


304 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

and learned member had the force of the law, or rather the 
force which the law had not; and he might observe that these 
manifestos, however flaming and however flowery, reminded 
him in one respect of certain puffing advertisements, promul¬ 
gated by crafty and plausible empirics, in which, after reiterated 
allusions to their own long experience and disinterested huma¬ 
nity, they invariably conclude by adding, “ correspondents in 
the country are. expected to enclose a bank-note.” 

“ Societies may flourish or may fade, 

A breath can make them, as a breath has made ; 

But a bold pisantry, their country’s pride, 

Now grudge the cash so fruitlessly supplied.” 

And, therefore, the sinews of war are very sparingly forthcom¬ 
ing. .The people of Ireland are beginning to open their eyes, 
and consequently to shut their purses. Contributors are literally 
worn out by a system of perpetual pre-payment. They find 
that their shillings never fructify to their own advantage in the 
unfathomable exchequer of these ephemeral institutions; that 
their great leader, like Falstaff, is no friend to the double 
trouble of paying back, and for this reason, if I might borrow a 
Chinese phrase, the silver is not “ oozing out ” so rapidly as it 
used to do; and when confiscations are exhorted at chapels, or 
auditors entreated at public meetings to prove the liberality 
of their political sentiments by the largeness and alacrity of 
their donations, they seemed disposed, and very naturally^ to ex¬ 
claim, in reference to the destination and the prospects of their 
money— 

“ Vestigia terrent, 

Omnia te adversum spectantia nulla retrorsum.” 

If he could only ensure a smooth passage across the channel, 
and obtain such a safe conduct as might be depended upon, he 
should like of all things to address the “ mixed multitude ” on 
the Corn Exchange. He might, indeed, find some difficulty in 
composing a picturesque peroration d la Claude Lorraine, em¬ 
bellished with green valleys, lofty mountains, fertile plains, and 
meandering rivers; but he should take care that his hearers 
should be reminded for the seven hundredth time of the 700 
years, during which their country has been misgoverned by 
England, according to the honourable and learned member, or, as 


HIS SPEECH ON IRELAND, IN 1840. 


305 


he (Sir George Sinclair) contended, by the Pope. But he should 
at all events be provided with a ready-made and indispensable 
exordium, for no speech would go down upon such an occasion 
that was not ushered in by “ hereditary bondsmen ; ” and he 
should, therefore, begin by exclaiming, “ Hereditary bondsmen ” 
to your agitators and your priests, how grossly have your under¬ 
standings been outraged, how wantonly have your feelings been 
excited, how cruelly have your hopes been disappointed ! Did 
one of you ever derive, from being enrolled in the ranks of the 
precursor society, any benefit equivalent to the shillings which 
you paid for your admission ? 

After some further observations of a general kind, Sir 
George Sinclair proceeded to bring liis batteries to bear 
against Mr. O'Connell, then in the plenitude of his power 
in Ireland. 

Mr. O’Connell tells you that he is trying an experiment. 
Believe me it is an experiment upon your patience and cre¬ 
dulity. I was not at all surprised at being asked last year by 
a respectable tradesman, who premised that he was no scholar, 
whether precursor was the Latin word for dupe ? An experi¬ 
ment implies, on the part of him who embarks in it, a belief in, 
at least, the possibility of his own success. If you saw a man 
jumping in the Phoenix Park, and he were to say that he was 
trying an experiment whether he could leap over the moon, you 
would at once infer that he was either a lunatic or an impostor. 
Mr. O’Connell knew as well as he did, that as long as there was 
a House of Lords, or even a reformed House of Commons, he 
had just as good a prospect, and no better, of carrying through 
Parliament any of the measures which he professes his anxiety 
to see enacted. But his real object merely is, to keep the 
present Ministry in office on any terms, and at any price, and to 
ensure their co-operation by holding out the hope of advantages, 
not one of which he knows can ever be realised. There has not 
been so dexterous a wizard since the days of the bottle-conjuror, 
who contrived to make a gaping multitude pay their shillings, 
in the confident expectation that they would see him step into 
a pint decanter; and you, my friends, are such tractable 


30 G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


camel-swallowers, that if he were to sow a field with flints, 
and solemnly affirm that if they did not in the course of 
twelve months yield a plentiful crop of potatoes he would 
hoist the standard of repeal, you would all, to a man, not 
only wait most patiently, hut anticipate the favourable result. 
Do you really think that he himself for a single moment 
expects to obtain a larger proportion of representatives for 
Ireland, or a further confiscation of the property of the Church ? 
He does not even dare to broach either subject in the House 
of Commons. Ask him why he allows so many months to 
elapse, or rather sessions to jmss, without having taken one 
single step in furtherance of the schemes which he declares to 
be indispensable to the best interests of his country ? The 
truth, my friends, is, that he is quite unrivalled in the histrionic 
art—to him “All the world’s a stage ”— “Modo me Thebis, modo 
r ponit Athenis” —to-day, he is all in all with the Jews—to¬ 
morrow, hand and glove with the Jesuits—one week he is 
feasting at Liverpool—another time fasting at La Trappe ; but 
you have often the good fortune to witness his inimitable per¬ 
formance of characters which he is very shy of assuming on 
the parliamentary stage. He is great as Sir Giles Overreach, 
and I defy you to match him as Sir Benjamin Backbite. In 
the former of these characters, he contrives to buoy you up with 
the fond expectations of unattainable benefits, or rather of 
objects which, even if acquired, would in no respect ameliorate 
your condition, by causing you to enjoy one comfort more or 
endure one privation less. If all his plans were accomplished, 
you would ere long be mournfully exclaiming, “ Was it for this 
that we have been breaking so many heads at fairs, and so many 
promises at hustings ? Was it for this that we have so often 
trudged twenty miles in the dead of the night and in the middle 
of the rain to attend anti-tithe meetings, when we might just 
as well have stayed in our beds ? ” But, my friends, when 
enacting the other part, does he not strive to excite in your 
breasts an unfounded and unextinguishable animosity against 
his opponents (who, let me tell you, are often, in reality, your 
best friends), by branding them with names, and overwhelming 
them with calumnies, which, in their presence and within the 
walls of Parliament, he seems to have registered a vow in 


HIS SPEECH ON IRELAND, IN 1810. 


307 


heaven never to reiterate ? Not long ago he designated my 
noble friend, the author of this bill, as a bad man ? Will he 
venture to repeat this charge in the hearing of his friends'? 
Will he tell the British House of Commons that my noble friend 
is a bad son, a bad husband, a bad father, a bad neighbour, a 
bad landlord, a bad Christian ? Has he ever been bad enough 
to sacrifice principle for the sake of place, or to promote his 
private interests by exciting the worst passions of others ? The 
Conservative party was not unfrequently reproached with assert¬ 
ing that her Majesty’s ministers are kept in place by commanding 
the support of a majority of the Irish representation. Why, this 
very circumstance was much oftener dwelt upon by the hon. 
member for Dublin himself, as a source of exultation on his 
part, and a claim for gratitude on theirs. He was far from 
drawing any invidious line of distinction between the members 
deputed from the different portions of the united empire. He 
entertained the highest respect, not only for the Irish gentlemen 
who sat on his side of the house, but for many (such as the 
members for Kildare or Roscommon, for the city of Waterford, 
or the town of Galway) whom he had the misfortune to see 
opposed to them. But he could not fail to observe that this 
scanty ministerial majority was eked out by the votes of some 
gentlemen from Ireland, who would not be returned to Parlia¬ 
ment if justice were done to all parties, the principles of the law 
clearly defined, and its provisions impartially applied: this was 
the only object for which this bill was introduced. This was the 
only ground upon which it was supported. His noble friend 
had fearlessly undertaken and faithfully discharged a most im¬ 
portant public duty. The demagogue might pour the vials of 
slander upon his motives—the priest might threaten him with 
the assassin’s knife—but he had established an irrefragable and 
imperishable claim upon the respect, the admiration, and grati¬ 
tude of all who were anxious to restore the lustre and secure 
the permanence of our national institutions. 

With the exception of the terrible onslaughts which 
Lord Stanley was in the habit of making on Mr. 
O'Connell, I do not know that anything could have 


308 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


made the latter smart so much as the polished wit of Sir 
George Sinclair. Mr. O’Connell, who had a great per¬ 
sonal regard for Sir George, and with whom he was on 
somewhat intimate terms, replied to the speech from 
which I have given the above extracts, and paid Sir 
George some very high compliments. A gentleman who 
was in the House at the time, mentioned to me the other 
day, that he remembers, as well as if it had oidy been an 
incident of yesterday, hearing Mr. O’Conn ell’s answer to 
Sir George, and making, in reference to a custom which 
Sir George had when speaking, of twisting his hat, the 
following remark :—“ His hon. friend (Sir George Sin¬ 
clair) reminded him of the well-known lines in Goldsmith’s 
‘ Village Schoolmaster ’:— 

“ ‘ And still he gazed, and still the wonder grew, 

That one small hat could carry all he knew.’ ” 

The compliments paid, on this occasion, by Mr. O’Con¬ 
nell to Sir George, for his great and varied attainments, 
were heartily responded to by the cheers of the House. 



CHAPTER XIV. 


Correspondence with Peers of the Realm—The late Duke of Sutherland—Let¬ 
ters from the Duke to Sir George Sinclair—Letters to Sir George Sinclair 
from the late Duke of Newcastle—The late Duke of Manchester—The 
Duke of Argyll—The late Marquis of Normanby—The late Earl of Derby 
—The late Lord Lyndhurst—The late Lord Brougham—The late Lord 
Ashburton. 

So very voluminous was the correspondence which Sir 
George Sinclair had with the most eminent men of the 
day,—whether socially, or philosophically, or philan- 
thropically,—that, in going through his very varied 
correspondence, I have often felt quite perplexed in my 
endeavours to decide as to the classification which would 
he most appropriate for particular letters addressed to 
him. In the title which Sir George was pleased 
to give,—and which to me seems a most appro¬ 
priate one,—to one of the volumes of manuscript which 
has been placed in my hands, I find a classification, or 
generic terms, which will answer all purposes, so far as 
those who are Members of the House of Commons are 
concerned. He has entitled the volume—“ Letters from 
Members of the House of Commons.” But Sir George 
carried on a close and cordial intercourse in writing 
with many who were not Members of the House of 
Commons, but Peers of the realm. Few men of the 
present day have had a more intimate or extensive cor¬ 
respondence with the Peers of the realm, than Sir George 





310 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Sinclair had. I have in my possession a large collection 
of letters, of the most friendly and familiar kind, written 
to Sir George, from dukes, from marquises, and from all 
the other grades of our nobility. In this respect, indeed, 
I feel embarrassed by the abundance of my riches, when 
I apply myself to the task of selection. I can spare only 
space for a comparatively few specimens of the letters 
thus addressed to Sir George from his aristocratic corres¬ 
pondents. 

I beef in with the Duke of Sutherland. His Grace was 

O 

not only a frequent, but one of the most copious of Sir 
George Sinclair’s correspondents. Any one reading the 
Dukes numerous letters to the latter, would naturally 
feel surprised that,—being a man of such accurate and 
varied information on the great public questions of the 
day, as his letters show him to have been, and being also 
a Peer of the realm, and the head of one of the greatest 
families in England,—he should have been unknown in 
connection with the debates and deliberations which take 
place in the House of Lords. The reason was, his great 
infirmity of imperfect hearing. It is strange that though 
the fact was, of course, known to all those in the station 
of life in which the Duke moved, the public generally 
were not aware of his great deafness. To this circum¬ 
stance the Duke makes a special reference in one of his 
letters to Sir George. He does so not in any murmuring 
spirit, but as regretting his very defective hearing, 
because depriving him of the pleasure which he would 
otherwise enjoy in the society of his friends. Nothing 
could be finer than the feeling with which he refers to 
his infirmity. He was, indeed, a man of the most amiable 
disposition. He was, at the same time, constitutionally, 



EASY-MINDED NOBLEMEN. 


311 


a man of a singularly easy mind. Events of the greatest 
importance, in relation to himself personally, did not for 
a moment disturb his equanimity. Never was it more 
true of any man than of the Duke, that—to use a 
common phrase—he took things coolly. One remarkable 
and amusing instance of this was furnished on the most 
interesting day of his life. On the morning of the day 
of his marriage, a friend of his found him leaning care¬ 
lessly over the railing at the edge of the water in St. 
James’s Park, and throwing crumbs of bread to the 
ducks. His friend, surprised at seeing him at such a 
place and so engaged, within two hours of the time ap¬ 
pointed for his marriage to one of the finest women in 
England,—one in whose veins the blood of the Howards 
flowed, —exclaimed : “ What, you here to-day ! I thought 
you were going to be married this morning ? ” “Yes,” 
was his answer, given with the most perfect nonchalance , 
and throwing a few more crumbs to the ducks, with¬ 
out moving from the railing on which he was leaning, 
“Yes, I believe I am.” 

Something of the same easy-mindedness occurred not 
long ago. A nobleman, now a Duke, but then a Marquis, 
had asked a friend of his who was a better judge of 
carriages than himself, to accompany him to Long Acre, 
to advise him in reference to the purchase of a carriage. 
A day was fixed on for the two to go together to make 
the intended purchase ; but on the day preceding the one 
appointed, the then Marquis wrote to his friend the fol¬ 
lowing brief note :—“ It will not be necessary to meet 
me to-morrow to go to Long Acre to look for a carriage. 
From a remark made by the Duke [his father] to-day, 
I fancy I am going to be married ! ” Not only had the 





312 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Marquis left his father to choose a bride for him, and to 
make the other necessary matrimonial arrangements; but 
when the intimation was made to him by the Duke, that 
the future Marchioness had been fixed on, he seemed to 
view the whole affair as if it had been one which did not 
concern him in the least. 

The first letter which I will give from the Duke of 
Sutherland to Sir G-eorge Sinclair, refers in the opening 
to the infirmity of deafness to which I have alluded as 
one to which he was subject. But it will be observed 
how soon he turns away from that affliction to the ex¬ 
pression of the pleasure it gave him to go about among 
the poor, and do all the good he could to them. The 
remainder of his letter shows how great was his intelli¬ 
gence in relation to the best mode of managing estates, 
and dealing with the question of making provision for 
the paupers of Scotland. The letter is dated— 

Dunrobin, October 8tb, 1848. 

My dear Sir George, 

I am very much obliged to you for sending to me Dr. Turn- 
hull’s remarks. If I have an opportunity of consulting him I 
will certainly take it, for the inconvenience of not hearing is very 
great; hut I must own that, after consulting and trying many, 
I begin to think my case so much connected with health in other 
respects, that I have little hope; but it is well and right to try. 

Your own good disposition and anxious consideration of the 
poor, induce you to give willing credit to any accounts of endea¬ 
vours to improve their condition ; and you really give me more 
than I deserve for anything new in that respect. The fact is, 
that not being a hunter or sportsman, I know no occupation 
more easy or more agreeable to myself than going about among 
them, and then one can be of use in many little things. Some¬ 
times rebuking and finding fault, &c., or more satisfactorily en¬ 
couraging or commending, one feels that it is not labour in vain. 

This is a position of duty; but there is something in the ways 


LETTER FROM THE LATE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND. 313 


or character of our Northern people that make it much more 
agreeable and inviting than I find it in Staffordshire. I also feel 
that, having such an extent of property here that might generally 
be under the care of half-a-dozen proprietors, properly requires 
more than one can well contrive to give, and it is only the con¬ 
viction that the factors are well acquainted with all the people 
that reconciles me to the having such a responsibility. I have 
pleasure in seeing the improvements, and in really finding a degree 
of comfort and well-doing generally prevailing in these districts. 
The employment given here, no doubt has effected this, but 
that is of a temporary nature, yet it gives habits. My English 
physician assures me he has not seen one drunken man all this 
summer. Captain Elliott’s investigation has also been extremely 
satisfactory, but I am cut short in schemes for want of funds. 
Many suppose that because I have expended much, I must be 
rich, but that very reason, truly considered, would lead to a very 
different conclusion, as I have been for some time spending more 
than my resources can afford. 

I obtained this year an act for a harbour here. I find the cost 
would exceed the first ideas very much ; and engineers differ 
about the proper position of piers, breakwaters, &c. I feel ob¬ 
liged to desist. I am, however, under our friend Mr. Bremner’s 
care, building what I hope will prove a very useful little harbour 
near Tongue, which must content me for the present. 

Amongst other schemes, that which most occupies me now is 
the making a road from the east to the west coast,—that is, a 
new road through a part of country chiefly a desert. It will 
be thirty-two miles, without any ascents of consequence, and will 
make fourteen miles difference in access to a very fine natural 
harbour, and open a country in which many acres may prove 
capable of cultivation for turnips, &c., for sheep and for man. If 
I could make arrangements similar to those of the Boss-shire 
proprietors, which I find very generally approved of in regard to 
undertaking the maintenance of the people, or receiving assist¬ 
ance for such work from the Destitution Committees, I should 
immediately begin, and thus give temporary employment for 
some time, and open means generally for more in future. 

This is the principal scheme I have now before me, but my 
time of stay, I fear, draws to a conclusion ; and I am abruptly 


314 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

deprived of that of the Duchess. She received disquieting ac¬ 
counts of the health of Lord Carlisle, of sudden increase of weak¬ 
ness and a fit of gout, and determined to proceed at once, and 
set out on Thursday on this melancholy journey. She hoped to 
be able to return North as far as Inverary, where I shall expect 
her. I always leave this with reluctance, and always with the 
hope of passing the next long summer days in Sutherland. 

I am, my dear Sir George, 

Faithfully yours, 

Sutherland. 


The next letter which I will lay before my readers, 
from the Duke of Sutherland to Sir George Sinclair, is, 
it will be observed, dated on the 5th of April, 1849, more 
than twenty years ago. At that time the question of 
making a legal provision for the paupers in Scotland was 
exciting great interest in that country. It was a question 
which especially affected the landed proprietors north of 
the Tweed. I express no opinion with regard to the 
soundness of the views, or otherwise, of the Duke of 
Sutherland, in relation to the propriety of passing a 
legislative measure for a compulsory provision for the 
Scottish poor. I give this letter of the Duke as one 
only of the many proofs, which his correspondence with 
Sir George Sinclair furnishes, that he not only took 
a deep interest in the great questions of the day, 
but that he had a clear comprehension of them, and 
could write intelligently and bly on their nature and 
bearings. 


Trentham, April 5th, 1849. 

My dear Sir George, 

I thank you much for your communications. I shall order the 
pamphlet to be sent to me, that I may have the whole before 
me. If Lord Robertson and Lord Jeffrey’s law were proved to be 


LETTER FROM THE LATE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND. 


315 


tlie law, I should certainly apprehend all the evils and ruin which 
appear to you imminent; but I trust that, as is the case with 
every one who takes the deep interest you do, the constant 
every day intimate observation of poverty and the accompanying 
privations, and depression of spirit, and want of energy to meet 
and counteract these, especially when the poor can hope to obtain 
otherwise the means of meeting their immediate wants—I trust 
that the constant contemplation of this, and of the possible in¬ 
crease of evil, may have given rise to more gloomy apprehensions 
than if you were for a while out of reach of Thurso and the 
scenes and habits which you have so near and under your 
view. 

I grant that much may be found too generally in other and in 
all parts; and if one considers uninterruptedly the miseries of 
men, one may easily be more affected by the contemplation than 
elevated by that of the grandeur de Vhomme, of both of which 
Pascal treats with such admirable pathos. I am still of your 
former opinion, that compulsory charity was called for in Scot¬ 
land, notwithstanding the charities which, as you observe, and 
which Dr. Chalmers trusted to, are being exercised by many ; 
yet I cannot think the proprietors there sufficiently willing, 
and not in need of a spur. I would not have the whip used too 
much, but, avoiding exaggerations as much as possible, I think 
that a benevolent, really charitable, kind-hearted man,—such, 
for instance, as may be pointed out near Thurso,—more likely 
to be imposed on than the inspector. 

I don’t think that there has been found the reason to complain 
in Sutherland of the consequences of the Act, as many feared 
would be the case; but there is much to make one feel—as you 
are disposed,—much alarmed for the future, and concerned tor 
the present, actual condition, especially on our west coast : 
where, supposing Sir Robert Peel’s plan for Ireland to prove 
good for that country, our climate, soil, and local circumstances 
would not render it applicable. 

I am on the move,—going to London to-day, and thence to 
the Isle of Wight, or some sea-side, for change of air for our 
}mungest boy, who is recovering from a remittent fever. 

I have also been rather indisposed by a bilious attack, but 
am again recovering. 


31G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


What changes and continued perplexities amongst govern¬ 
ments and nations ! 

Ever faithfully, my dear Sir George, 

Yours very truly, 

Sutherland. 

The next letter from his Grace to Sir George begins, 
it will be observed, with the affectionate salutation of 
“.Mon cher Cousin.” This may seem strange to most 
people, because they have never heard of Sir George being 
a cousin of the Duke of Sutherland. The explanation is 
to be found in what I stated in the early part of this 
volume,—that, more than a century ago, Lady Janet 
Sutherland, sister of the Earl of Sutherland, and grand¬ 
aunt of the late Duke, married the grandfather of Sir 
George ; so that the Duke of Sutherland and Sir George 
Sinclair were cousins in the third degree. I remember that, 
some years ago, on being shown by the Hon. S. Walde- 
grave, late Bishop of Carlisle, a magnificently bound 
volume which the Queen had given him as a present, I 
was rather puzzled to know how the inscription by her 
Majesty could accord with the fact which it expressed. 
The inscription, written in the Queen's own hand, was, 
“ To the Hon. Samuel Waldegrave, Lord Bishop of Carlisle, 
from his affectionate Cousin, Victoria.” On asking the 
late most excellent bishop how the relationship was 
made out, he said that in the reign of Queen Anne an 
ancestor of his married a German Princess, who was an 
ancestor of Queen Victoria, and that in virtue of that 
marriage, .her Majesty always spoke of him as her 
cousin. 

The following letter cannot be said to be one of public 
importance, but it is interesting as showing the Duke’s 


LETTER FROM THE LATE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND. 


317 


high regard for the Sinclair family, and his own warm¬ 
heartedness and courteous manners. 

Dunrobin, Sept. 24th, 1849. 

Mon cher Cousin, 

My dear Sir George, 

Oil my return from a delightful visit to Assynt, which I hope 
often to repeat, as I have just taken possession of a pied-a-terre at 
Loch Niver, and having had perfect weather for the enjoyment of 
the country,—which is beautiful and very striking in scenery, and 
I have had opportunity of going through much of it, and of mak¬ 
ing acquaintance with many of the townships, containing a very 
interesting, industrious, and pleasing people, though very poor, 
as I fear must be always their condition,—I find your kind 
letter of the 21st. It would have given great pleasure to my 
boys and to Mr. Bunsen, to have accepted your kind invitation, 
and I should have had much pleasure to have been of the party, 
but we have lately been constantly on the move, first to Tongue, 
and since to Assynt, and I have still so much more business to 
do than I can possibly accomplish satisfactorily, that I must 
have a few days here, and must keep them also. I hope some 
other time to have the pleasure you now offer to them, if we be 
spared, a condition which I, being, you know, your senior, should 
always have in mind, though I need not express it so constantly 
as we Scotch are fond of doing. 

I heard from your brother Alexander lately. He said that he 
could and would pass a couple of days here, on his way north ; 
and I in answer said he must come directly, as I was on the point 
of going on Wednesday to Assynt. I hoped to have seen him 
in the interval, but he did not appear, and I fear has given up 
his intention. I should have had pleasure in seeing him. My 
movements now are 'uncertain; if I were quite well and up 
to the necessary bustle, I should have been to-day with the 
Duchess at Inverary, in the hope of finding it a little more 
quiet, but may have to go at any time, and therefore wish to do 
what is most pressing here as soon as I can. I always remember 
with great pleasure my visit “ forty years since,” to your father, 
at Thurso, and I feel that I should have a renewal of pleasure 
in another visit, and in talking of past times, and a thousand 
things with you. I cannot think your kind invitation unreason- 


318 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


able or unseasonable, but hope that Lady Camilla, to whom I 
beg leave to present my compliments, will allow me to consider 
it as still open for whatever time may be fortunately at my dis¬ 
posal hereafter. 

I am, my dear Sir George, 

Very truly yours, 

Sutherland. 

The next and last letter to Sir George Sinclair from 
the Duke of Sutherland which I shall give, is one of a 
very touching nature. It solely consists of an account 
of the illness and death of his son, Lord Frederick, who 
had gone out to take part in the Crimean war of 1854. 
I can bear testimony, from other sources than either the 
Duke or any members of the Sutherland family, to all, 
and even more than all, that the Duke says of the noble 
and chivalrous character of his son. The narrative given 

O 

to me of the way in which he bore his illness,—his gene¬ 
rous consideration for all around him, when himself lying 
prostrate from fever; his perfect acquiescence in the 
pleasure of Providence in laying him low; his refusal 
to accept of special indulgences which were offered to 
him, because others could not have them; his extreme 
anxiety that none of his family at home, especially his 
mother, the Duchess, should know how ill he was, because 
of the profound sorrow it would cause them,—these were 
circumstances in the youthful noblemaiTs case which 
filled all who saw him in his illness with the highest 

O 

admiration. The letter to Sir George Sinclair from the 
Duke will be seen to have been written in answer to one 
of condolence from Sir George. The following is the 
letter:— 

Ci ^ Nov - Srd > 1854 ‘ 

My dear Sir George, 

I thank you very sincerely for your kind letter, and I must 



LETTER FROM THE LATE DUKE OF SUTHERLAND. 319 


tell you that I had thought of you, and I felt that you would 
feel for us. No preparation from thought of the necessary dan¬ 
gers of such a war could sufficiently prepare for the fatal blow. 
I received the information in a letter from Lord George Pan let 
of the “ Bellerophon ” man-of-war, who, having heard from the 
captain of the “ Leander,” on his arriving at Eupatoria, with pro¬ 
visions for the fleet, that our son was in bed witli fever on board 
a transport, visited him with his surgeon, conveyed him on 
board his ship, gave wp his cabin, and all the most kind atten¬ 
tion that a father could have given. Dr. Blake, of the “Leander,” 
had attended him three days before this, but during about a 
month he had been in bed in the transport, without the least 
advice, as the transport had not any. 

The captain of it stated that though confined to bed by weak¬ 
ness and suffering, he had never uttered a murmur or complaint, 
and the captain is said by the surgeon to have been startled at 
hearing of the danger, and that the delay had made it imme¬ 
diate. Lord George Paulet writes that Fred expressed delight 
at the change, and that he (Lord George) had hoped that it and 
the care of the surgeon, who did all that human attention could 
effect, might have brought him round to recovery. But the 
next day, the 6th of October, at ten minutes to four o’clock, he 
breathed his last, calmly, and the surgeon, who was with him, 
says, without pain. Nearly the last desire was that the surgeon 
should write to us in his name, as he would dictate. He had 
some time before he died dictated to an officer, and he had 
written twice since he was left in the transport, a few lines, 
hardly legible, begging his mother not to be alarmed, as he 
hoped soon to be better; he then said to the surgeon not to do 
it, as it would alarm, and that he would do it himself. 

Lord Raglan had most kindly written to me on the 18th of 
October, to say that fever prevented his landing, and that the 
best medical advice stated that change of climate gave the best 
chance of recovery, and that he would probably have to return 
to England. We had in consequence expected to hear of him, 
and the Duchess would have gone to him if he had been any¬ 
where on the way home. It seems that he desired not to go to 
Constantinople with the ship that conveyed the wounded, and 
remained waiting for another opportunity, which came too late. 


320 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


We have, indeed, as you so kindly suggest, much reason for 
consolation. All who knew him express esteem and friendship ; 
and we know that he was as a son among the very best possible, 
and religiously good and excellent; and I have felt that it is a 
soothing thought that by the mercy of God,—though he had 
chosen his profession though the Duchess had frequently ex¬ 
pressed to him apprehension of want of strength and health 
for it; he was bent on discharging his duty, and of proving him¬ 
self equal to all it might require ;—yet, by Divine mercy, he was 
spared from engaging in the battle, however glorious, and from 
the scene of carnage, which must make a sad impression on the 
recollection, even to have seen. It is soothing to know that 
friends attended his last hours. They did all that friends could 
do, and he is at peace. 

Yours, most truly, 

My dear Sir George, 

Sutherland. 

I ought here to mention that Sir George Sinclair and 
the Duchess of Sutherland also corresponded with each 
other, and some of her Grace's letters are lying before me. 
They are characterised throughout by that genial and 
generous feeling which, in unison with her personal 
attractions, made her one of the most admired and 
esteemed ladies within her Majesty’s dominions. 

Among those who took part in the correspondence 
which was carried on between Sir George and members 
of the highest order of the Peerage, I find several from 
the Duke of Newcastle, grandfather of the present Duke. 
Probably the Duke of Newcastle to whom I refer, will 
be better known when I mention that he is the Duke 
who took so prominent a part in the opposition which 
was given to the Reform Bill, in 1832, when, in rela¬ 
tion to the attacks made upon him because of the com¬ 
pulsion he exercised on the electors of his borough of 


THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE OF TWENTY YEARS AGO. 321 

Newark, as to the way in which they should vote, he 
exclaimed, in the language of Scripture, “ Have I not a 
right to do what I will with mine own ? " That phrase, 
in connection with the sentiments it expressed, has dis¬ 
tinguished that Duke of Newcastle—the correspondent 
of Sir George Sinclair—from all other dukes of the 
name, either as regards those who had gone before or 
followed after him. The phrase became a household one. 
It was for years in everybody's mouth, and is often still 
used in the assertion of one's assumed individual right to 
do as he pleases. The most extraordinary use I ever 
remember to have heard made of the expression was in 
the case of a man who some time ago was brought before 
one of our police courts for beating and otherwise mal¬ 
treating his wife. His answer to the charge was not a 
denial, or even an attempted extenuation of the crime 
imputed to him, but a simple assertion of the Duke 
of Newcastle's doctrine in one of its new applications, 
—that every man had a right to do what he liked with 
his own wife ; and the wife of the person in question 
being his own property, according to all law, he con¬ 
tended that he had a right to beat her as often and as 
much as he pleased. 

But the reason why I allude to the letters of the Duke 
of Newcastle, written twenty years ago to Sir George, is 
because of the opportunity it affords me of remarking 
that, like many other Tories of his time, he cherished an 
unmitigated enmity to the late Sir Bobert Peel. “ I agree," 
said the Duke, writing to Sir George, “ with Lord George 
Bentinck in his opinion of Sir Robert Peel. I have for 
many years entertained the most watchful distrust of 
him. He is a modern Judas, and I believe would betray 


322 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


any individual or any cause/' Nor are these feelings 
towards the memory of the late Sir Robert Peel yet 
extinct; they exist in their full force in many minds 
down to the present hour. 

The next letter from one of Sir George Sinclair s 
ducal friends and correspondents is from the pen of the 
Duke of Manchester, who, as Viscount Mandeville, was, 
perhaps, of all others the one with whom, in the early 
part of his parliamentary career, he was most intimately 
acquainted, because of the similarity of their views on 
religious subjects. There is nothing remarkable or of 
general interest in the subjoined letter from the late Duke 
of Manchester to Sir George ; but to those who are partial 
to the study of theological questions it will possess 
some interest, because of the opinion which the Duke 
expresses in it relative to a point which has for ages been 
much mooted among Biblical critics, and is not yet 
finally set at rest. The controverted theological point to 
which I allude is, as to the original language in which 
the Gospel of St. Matthew was written. Men equally 
eminent for their theological scholarship have entertained 
entirely different opinions on the point,—some contending 
that it was written in Hebrew, others in Greek, while 
not a few have maintained, with a great show of learning, 
that it was originally written in both languages. The 
Duke of Manchester was thoroughly convinced that the 
first of the four Gospels was originally written in Greek 
only, and published a brochure with the view of establish¬ 
ing the point. I believe that the more prevalent and still 
extending belief is, that it was written simultaneously 
both in Hebrew and Greek. The Duke of Manchester 
was a firm believer in the personal reign of Christ on 


LETTER FROM THE DUKE OF MANCHESTER. 


323 


earth, and it is in the MiUenarian sense of the words that 
he concludes his letter, which I subjoin. 

Kimbolton, May 31st, 1854. 

My dear Sir George, 

Your letter, which I received this morning, gave me great 
grief in showing to me that my neglect had been in any way a 
cause of sorrow to you ; but you know how bad a correspondent 
I always was, and for these last four or five years I have been 
constantly in a state of worry, and latterly my health has been 
very much broken. 

I am glad you like the pamphlet. I have heard from several 
their belief that it establishes the Greek original of Matthew, 
and goes far to solve the chief difficulties connected with the 
Gospels. 

What an anxious state things are in now. Many now look to 
prophecy, who used to smile at the students of the prophetic 
book. I confess I am very anxious, though I do not see the 
signs of the last great development. When it comes may we 
all be found waiting for His appearing, 

Believe me, 

Affectionately yours, 

Manchester. 

There was one more ducal friend and correspondent of 
Sir George, namely, the Duke of Argyle, from whose 
letters I will make only one selection, and with that I 
will close the friendly communications which Sir George 
received from members of the highest order of the 
Peerage. The letter of the Duke relates to the fisheries 
in Scotland : a question wdiicli was, at the time it was 
written,—now nearly twenty years ago,—exciting much 
attention north of the Tweed. Since then, circumstances 
have occurred to invest it with great importance within 
the last few years, as our late legislation on the subject 
proves. The letter is one which shows that the writer 
was a person of superior abilities, and that he had not 


324 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


only paid much attention to the subject, but had acquired 
a thorough knowledge of it. 


London, July 1st, 1850. 


My dear Sir George, 

Warned by the repeated failures of every recent attempt to 
amend the fishery laws of Scotland, I have been exceedingly 
anxious to avoid what I conceive to have been their error and 
source of weakness—their having attempted too much. 

There are many faults in the present law of fisheries in Scot¬ 
land which require amendment, and I have had numerous sug¬ 
gestions ; but I am anxious to limit this bill to what I conceive 
to be clearly and admittedly a good by all parties almost—to 
wit, that the fishing of salmon should cease at least one fortnight 
earlier than under the present law. 

The period of spearing is a much more difficult matter. You 
know of course the attempt which was made to map out Scot¬ 
land with zones, and make a separate law for each. But I be¬ 
lieve that no such disunion can ever be effected, inasmuch as 
the different seasons of different rivers are determinal under 
laws which we do not know, and which has no connection with 
mere geographical position. I do see in the evidence taken be¬ 
fore the committee of both houses, that a few rivers are repre¬ 
sented as having a full supply of clean fish long before the 
present period of spearing. I believe, however, that there are 
few such ; and I am much surprised and much interested in the 
statement you made as regards the extraordinary early period 
at which clean fish run up the Thurso. I think your suggestion 
in regard to rivers belonging to one sole proprietor most de¬ 
serving of consideration. The great difficulty arises from the 
obvious consideration that if these few rivers are open when others 
were closed, every poached salmon could be represented as be¬ 
longing to the former, and if sold be exceedingly difficult to 
prevent wholesale poaching. But I do think that when other 
points of the present law come to be revised, your suggestion 
will be very carefully weighed. The cross benches always 
receive the fire of both sides, and, as you say, we have both 
received not a few broadsides. 

It seems to me very long since I have had the pleasure of 


LETTER FROM ARCHBISHOP WHATELY. 


325 


seeing you, but I cannot help hoping that even if you but move 
farther off from the Thurso, we may meet you some day near to 
Braca, where I shall much like both to talk and to throw over 
some salmon with you. 

I am, my dear Sir George, 

Yours, most sincerely, 

Argyll. 

Hitherto I have given letters addressed to Sir George 
Sinclair from the highest in rank among those who 
are called “ the Lords Temporal.” Before I come to 
give letters from other grades of the Temporal Peers, it 
is fitting I should give at least one letter to Sir George 
from a peer of the highest rank among the “ Lords Spi¬ 
ritual.” As none of our modern archbishops have had a 
reputation for literary ability and accomplishments at all 
approaching that of the late Dr. Whately, Archbishop of 
Dublin, it is-due to that eminent prelate that I should 
give one of his letters to Sir George. The date of the 
Archbishops letter is, “ 17, Hereford Street, Park Lane, 
April 17, 1849.” It is short, but it refers to one point 
which will be found interesting to authors of publica¬ 
tions which are brought out in the pamphlet form. 
The letter is as follows 

Dear Sir, 

It is rarely that a pamphlet sells enough to pay expenses. I 
have published Charges, and many others, which usually sell 
enough to defray great part of the cost; and then I give away 
often, to those to whom it would be an object, many more 
copies. 

In reference to one passage in your eighth Letter, I would 
remark, that the Report of the Irish Poor Inquiry Commission 
(which I presume you are acquainted with) was far from being 
what the Ministry who appointed it would have dictated or 
approved. 


326 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Whether they would have appointed the Commissioners they 
did, had they foreseen how restive we should prove, I cannot say. 

Then, as to well-paid Commissioners, we, and also the English 
Commissioners in the same matter, were paid nothing,—though 
a writer in the Quarterly Review , with an audacity rare, even 
in that journal, spoke of the latter as a job ! So that a Commis¬ 
sion might be recommended exempt from these two objections. 

Believe me to be, 

Very faithfully yours, 

R. Dublin. 

In relation to the fact that pamphlets rarely pay the 
cost of printing and paper, the late Archbishop of Dublin 
might have gone much further. He might have quoted 
the Edinburgh Review to show that it is an ascertained 
fact, that not one pamphlet in five hundred pays the 
expenses of publication. 

Sir George Sinclair had on his list of friends and 
correspondents the name of the late Marquis of Normanby, 
who, between forty and fifty years ago, enjoyed no in¬ 
considerable reputation as an author of works of fiction, 
when Lord Mulgrave. The most popular and successful 
of these was, “ Yes and No.” 

Sir George Sinclair, as will hereafter be made to 
appear more fully, regarded with an intensity of dislike 
I have never known to be surpassed, the conduct of 
Louis Napoleon ever since the coup d’etat of 1852. 
He looked upon that deed, all things considered, as the 
most enormous crime which has been committed in our 
day ; and that feeling being, without any diminution of 
its strength, ever present to his mind, he never ceased, 
whether in conversation or written correspondence, to 
express it in the most emphatic language he could 
employ. He regarded it as a sacred and imperative 


HIS HOSTILITY TO LOUIS NAPOLEON. 


327 


duty so to speak and so to write. It was with him a 
matter of conscience to hold up the author of the coup 
cl'etat and the regime which followed, to the execration 
not of this country only, but to that of the whole 
world. These explanatory observations are necessary 
to an understanding of the two letters of the Marquis 
of Normanby which I am about to give. It will be seen 
from the first letter that Sir George had written to the 
Marquis, complaining, at the time he wrote, of the sub¬ 
serviency, in the majority of cases, of the London press 
to the Imperialism of France, and the want of fidelity to 
constitutional principles and moral courage—so far as 
Napoleon was concerned—of the remainder of the metro¬ 
politan journals. There was only one among all the 
London daily journals which was systematic and un¬ 
compromising in its hostility to the despotism of Louis 
Napoleon, and only two among the weekly papers that 
were opposed to Imperialism. And these two weekly 
journals were not hearty in their work. They but feebly 
and fitfully opposed the Napoleonic regime. Sir George 
Sinclair deeply deplored this. He looked upon it as dis¬ 
creditable to England, where the most perfect freedom 
of the press was enjoyed. And he felt this all the more 
sensibly, inasmuch as the press of France was deprived 
of the right of saying a single word, however mild, which 
Imperialism decided to be—no matter how forced the con¬ 
struction—adverse to the Government. In this state of 
things, Sir George, who had by this time written much in 
opposition to the French Empire in tracts and pamphlets, 
and in the only London daily journal whose columns 
were open to him—proposed to establish a weekly journal 
of small dimensions, at the low price of one halfpenny, 





328 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


for the sole purpose of keeping up by argument, invec¬ 
tive, and wit, an incessant fire on Napoleonism. 

Sir George repeatedly consulted me on this matter, but 
I pointed out to him that such a publication could not 
succeed, but must inevitably entail a serious pecuniary 
loss ; for that no journal devoted to the discussion of 
only one subject had ever yet been known to prove a 
success. The idea then occurred to Sir George, that 
some arrangement might be made with the Morning 
Chronicle , to purchase a certain amount of space, on 
certain days, in that journal for the promulgation and 
advocacy of his anti-Napoleonic sentiments. This, I 
ought to remark, was after the Morning Chronicle 
had ceased to be the paid organ of Imperialism, and was 
ready to devote its space for the advocacy of any prin¬ 
ciples, provided it was satisfied with the price which 
could be obtained for its services. It is to this matter that 
the Marquis of Normanby alludes in the subjoined letter. 

Hamilton Lodge, March 28th, 18G2. 

My dear Sir George, 

I have been so much occupied these last few days as not to 
have had a moment to answer your last note. The whole ques¬ 
tion of the present condition of the press is most important; but 
it is surrounded by so many difficulties of persons and of parties 
as to be at the same time very discouraging. 

The initiative ought to be taken by some one of more active 
social habits than my morbid life of the last few years has enabled 
me to maintain. I do not think, however, that it would do to 
connect any new speculation with such an effete print as the 
Morning Chronicle, which has now for so many years been 
dying by inches. It is rather a quaint confirmation of what we 
have both said. Our foreign friend tells us in this morning’s 
letter that Garibaldi forgot to give the King’s health at 
Milan. 


LETTERS OF THE MARQUIS OF NORMANBY. 


329 


I am sure you would have been very sorry to hear of the sud¬ 
den death of poor Lady Dillon. I was at her house—I will not 
say how many years ago. 

Yours very truly, 

Normanby. 

Some of the readers of this volume may feel surprised 
that persons in the high social rank which the Marquis 
of Normanby occupied, should be so intimately acquainted 
with the position of the press as he was at this time in 
relation to the Morning Chronicle ; but the fact is, 
that the press exercises so great a moral power on all 
classes of society, that the highest, not less than the 
lowest, take a lively interest in the fortunes of those 
newspapers which are best known. Lord Normanby’s 
opinion as to the then moribund state of the Morning 
Chronicle was soon afterwards proved to be correct by 
the death of that journal. 

The next letter of the Marquis of Normanby to Sir 
George Sinclair was written after reading a pamphlet by 
the latter respecting Imperialism, which was sent with 
that view by Sir George. What the opinion entertained 
by Lord Normanby of the French Emperor was, may be 
inferred from the expression,—“ The Anti-Imperial Dutch¬ 
man/’—which occurs in the first sentence. More is there 
meant than meets the eye. I leave its meaning to be 
divined, where it is not already so, by the reader, and 
proceed to give the letter, which is as follows :— 

Hamilton Lodge, May 19,1862. 

My dear Sir George, 

I enclose you, with many thanks, the pamphlet on the Anti- 
Imperial Dutchman, which is very clever and observant. 

You know, I thoroughly agree with you that the recognition 
of the regime established by Louis Napoleon’s coup diktat was 





330 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

the turning point which led to all the mischief which has since 
happened. You are quite right, too, in attributing the perma¬ 
nence of the evil to the conduct of the British nation itself, whose 
subserviency was infatuated indeed ; but if I am to make a 
criticism, I should say that it did not follow in the wake of the 
Court (?) and the Cabinet, because the Crown hardly can nowa¬ 
days interfere so directly as upon the question of the dismissal 
of Palmerston for his approval of the coup d'etat. That the vir¬ 
tuous indignation of the Sovereign led to so much subsequent 
humiliation was chiefly the fault of the English people, who, in 
their ready admiration of successful usurpation, did not support 
the Queen as she deserved. 

Yours very truly, 

Normanby. 

To this letter of the Marquis of Normanby, Sir George 
returned the following reply :— 

Norwood, Surrey, 1862. 

My dear Lord Normanby, 

I was, as usual, much gratified by the perusal of your obliging 
letter. I am, however, unable to agree with you in acquitting 
the Court of having unwisely and culpably acquiesced in the 
attentat of the Second of December. The disgrace of Lord 
Palmerston was not owing to his having signified his approval of 
that crime, but to his having done so without waiting for instruc¬ 
tions ; and I believe he would have been as much found fault 
with if he had, prematurely and of his own accord, denounced , 
instead of sanctioning, the deed ! The people of England can¬ 
not, I think, be held responsible for the invitation to Windsor, 
the bestowal of the Garter, the visit to Paris, and the pilgrimage 
to the tomb of the Due D’Enghien’s murderer. These steps 
would have been shrunk from with abhorrence by George the 
Fourth, and even by King William. I am not attempting to 
palliate the guilt and folly of the English nation, but merely to 
show that the head, as well as the members, are equally impli¬ 
cated in the disgrace. 

I am, my dear Lord Normanby, 

Yours very sincerely, 

George Sinclair. 


THE LATE EARL OF DERBY AS A THEOLOGIAN. 


331 


The late Lord Derby was another, among the Peers, of 
Sir George Sinclair’s intimate friends and frequent corre¬ 
spondents. A previous chapter shows the cordial terms 
on which they were with each other, while both were 
members of the House of Commons,—the former as Lord 
Stanley, and the latter, first as Mr. Sinclair, and after¬ 
wards as Sir George Sinclair. In the extracts which I 
shall give from the letters of Lord Derby to Sir George, 
I shall confine myself to some of those which were 
written between the years 1860 and 1863 . But before 
transferring any of them to these pages, it may be well 
to mention, that universally as Lord Derby is known, not 
only as a statesman but as an accomplished classical 
scholar, and as a man of general literary attainments of 
a high order, it is not generally known that he excelled 
in certain other things. Comparatively few, for instance, 
are aware that he had an intimate acquaintance with 
theology. Still fewer have any idea that he not only 
was a theologian, but that in early life he wrote religious 
books. He published one on the Parables of Christ 
when he was simply Mr. Stanley, and only about twenty- 
five years of age. It was, like his own religious views at 
that time, pervaded by a thoroughly evangelical spirit,— 
a fact which might, indeed, have been inferred from the 
mere circumstance of its having been published, at that 
time, by Nisbet & Co., from which house nearly all the 
leading evangelical works then emanated. As far as I 
remember, the volume consisted of about three hundred 
pages, and was published at three shillings and sixpence. 
It met with a very considerable sale, and was spoken of 
in very commendatory terms. It is now published at a 
cheaper rate by the Society for the Promotion of Chris- 



332 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


tian Knowledge,—Lord Derby having in the interim 
considerably modified his views in the direction of what 
is called High Churcliism. 

But it was not only as an author of evangelical works 
that Lord Derby, when Mr. Stanley, was known in early 
life as a religious man. He also took a prominent 
part in the promotion of evangelical views, by joining 
the Committee of the Hibernian School Society, and 
making evangelical speeches at public meetings in Free¬ 
masons Hall,—Exeter Hall not being built at the time. 
Nor was this all. A friend of mine lately told me that 
a Scotch friend of his, an eminent Doctor of Divinity, 
was on one occasion on a visit at Knowsley Park, and 
that Lord Derby read and expounded, at each morning’s 
family worship, a portion of Scripture. This eminent 
Scotch Divine added, that he never in the whole course 
of his life listened to more sound or more luminous 
expositions of the Bible, although he had heard, either in 
the pulpit or the parlour, expositions of the Holy Oracles 
by many of the most distinguished divines of the day. 

The following letter from Lord Derby to Sir George 
Sinclair refers in brief but emphatic terms to the trea¬ 
cherous conduct of Louis Napoleon, in relation to the 
annexation of Savoy, and the discredit which attached, 
and ever will attach, to the name of Victor Emmanuel, 
then King of Sardinia, and now King of Italy, for 
becoming a consenting party to that nefarious trans¬ 
action. The letter is dated 

St. James’s Square, March 17th, 18G0. 

My dear Sir George, 

4 7 

I have this morning received the Northern Ensign , with 
your “ verbosa et grandis Epistola,” which has much amused 



LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD DERBY. 


333 


me, although the subject is of rather too serious a character for 
amusement. I have also to thank you for your former commu¬ 
nications in the John o’ Groat’s Papers. Events are very critical 
at this moment, even more so than when you wrote : for the 
last forty-eight hours have completely stripped off the mask 
from both Emperor and King, and have shown themselves and 
their motives in the clearest, if not the cleanest point of view. 
What Europe will do remains to be seen; but I fear the various 
Powers are too much at variance with each other to hope that 
they will take the one safe course, and unite against the general 
disturbers of the peace of Europe. 

I am glad to find that though you have buried yourself alive, 
you have not ceased to take an interest in public affairs, and I 
assure you that it gave me great pleasure again to see your 
handwriting. 

Yours sincerely, 

Derby. 

The next letter from Lord Derby was written a few 
weeks after the preceding one. Sir George Sinclair 
was at that time writing to the Northern Ensign , one of 
the Caithness journals, letters of considerable length and 
in stronger terms in his condemnation of Louis Napo¬ 
leon’s conduct than was his wont to employ in relation 
to any other person or subject. Nothing, it will be seen, 
could have been much worse than Lord Derby’s opinion 
of Louis Napoleon. Lord Russell, when Lord John 
Russell, and Foreign Secretary to Lord Palmerston’s 
Administration, expressed in my hearing, in the House 
of Commons, an opinion of our “ powerful neighbour,” 
hardly less unfavourable. And Lord Palmerston himself, 
while Prime Minister, expressed on one occasion, in 
private to myself, in terms as strong as those employed 
either by Lord Derby or Lord John Russell, his repro¬ 
bation of the conduct of Louis Napoleon in relation 
to more than one of his principal acts. But Lord 


334 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Palmerston, like Lord Derby, felt that our policy was to 
avoid an open rupture with him, provided it could be 
done without national dishonour. The letter of Lord 
Derby is dated “St. James's Square, April 21, 1860 — 

My dear Sir George, 

I have this morning received and read the last of your series 
of letters in the Northern Ensign , and I fear you have taken 
only too just a view of the character and conduct of our power¬ 
ful neighbour. I cannot, however, subscribe to your conclusion, 
that we should precipitate a rupture, which I agree with you in 
considering only a matter of time, as no course, even were we 
better prepared for it than we are, could tend so much to 
strengthen and consolidate his power, as war with this country. 
Nor shall we, I am afraid, gain much in favourable opinion and 
disposition towards us, by a change of dynasty which should 
replace the Orleans branch upon the throne of France. The 
princes of that house are more hostile to this country than 
Louis Napoleon. And they openly, as I am told, express their 
approval of, and sympathy with, this last and grossest abuse of 
power,—the annexation of Savoy. But I am of opinion that all 
confidence in the sincerity of the Emperor is for ever destroyed; 
and that we must look henceforth to the necessity of being tho¬ 
roughly prepared for a rupture with him whenever the exigen¬ 
cies of his position make it his policy to come to an open 
quarrel. 

Meantime I regret to say that the spirit which now reigns 
over our counsels is very unfavourable to our being in the 
necessary state of preparedness, and the ascendancy of Bright 
and Cobden’s influence threatens to overpower all sense of 
national honour, and even of national danger. This year’s 
budget, and the Beform Bill with which we are menaced, 
should it pass in its present form, appear to me to point to a 
future full of apprehensions of the gravest character. 

I return, with thanks, the two notes from Berryer, enclosed in 
yours of the 13th, and am, 

Dear Sir George, 

Yours sincerely, 

Derby. 



LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD DERBY. 


335 


This letter is, in many respects, one of European 
importance, and will not fail to attract the attention of 
more than one of those great parties to whom allusion 
is made in it. 

Another letter from Lord Derby refers in terms 
sufficiently emphatic to leave no room to doubt how 
great the distrust was which he felt with regard to “ our 
powerful neighbour/’ Its date is “ St. James’s Square, 
August 15, I860:”— 

Dear Sir George, 

I return, with thanks, your German correspondent’s two 
letters and the newspaper article enclosed in your letter of the 
11th. The general distrust which the Emperor of the French 
has excited, and which he will find it very difficult to allay, has 
at least produced one good effect in occasioning a greater 
rapprochement between the German States, and especially 
between Austria and Prussia, than could have been produced 
by any less powerful motive. The manifestation of public 
opinion in Belgium was very striking, and will not have been 
without its influence on the Emperor’s mind and conduct. 
Even our own Government are beginning to find that they 
have been duped, and that it is absolutely necessary to be on 
their guard against the machinations of their ally. The Syrian 
business is an unfortunate addition to the previous complica¬ 
tions, and may be more so if there is, as I fear there is, a secret 
understanding between France and Russia. The latter power, 
however, is so exhausted, and has so much on her hands at 
home, that she must confine herself to intrigue, in which, to do 
her justice, she has no equal—not even in France. 

I leave town to-morrow, this long and wasted session being 
virtually at an end, though there is still much of routine work 
to be done. If the Conservative party have not been able to 
do all they could have wished, they have prevented much 
mischief, and by the position they have taken up have aided 
the less Radical portion of the Cabinet in resisting their more 
democratic colleagues. It is melancholy to see a man of 



33G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Gladstone’s abilities carried a,way by such wild theories, and 
subject to such influences as he has allowed to govern him of 
late. 

Believe me 

Yours sincerely, 

Derby. 

The next of Lord Derby’s letters to Sir George, which 
I transfer to these pages, I give as showing the friendly 
feeling which existed between the two, and the nature 
of the attacks of illness to which Lord Derby was so 
often subject:— 

Knowsley, April 18th, 18G2. 

Dear Sir George, 

I was unable at the time to thank you for your kind note of 
enquiry of the 14th, being still laid up by my attack of gout, 
following on influenza and quinsey, by which I have been 
greatly weakened, and for the time crippled. I hope, however, 
that change of air, for which I have been sent down here as 
soon as I was able to move, will set me up again in my ten 
days’ holiday. My hand is still very weak, and this is my first 
attempt at writing a note, so you will excuse its brevity. I am 
amused by an invitation from Mr. Foster, the American Spi¬ 
ritualist, to dinner. I do not even know him by sight, and 
never had the slightest communication with him. So much for 
intelligence on “good authority.” Your friend, Mr. Gruneisen, 
is a good man, and a good Conservative (though he would con¬ 
sider the term too mild), but he does not Avrite a good hand. 

Yours sincerely, 

Derby. 


We see in this letter an illustration of that courtesy 
which Lord Derby practised throughout his whole life, 
whether in its public or private relations. A mere kind 
inquiry from Sir George Sinclair as to the state of 
his health,—it having been mentioned in the public jour¬ 
nals that he had been ill,—called forth the above letter of 
thanks. 


LORD BROUGHAM AND SIR DAVID BREWSTER. 337 

The Mr. Foster, to whom a reference is made in the 
middle of Lord Derby’s letter, was an American who 
came over to this country, ten or twelve years ago, with 
letters of introduction to the chief Spiritualists on our 
side of the Atlantic. He was represented as being the 
most wonder-working “ Medium ” in the world. For a 
time he drew considerable numbers to witness phenomena 
and receive communications from those who had none 

O 

to the “spirit world,” for which gratification he charged 
a guinea a head, just as a physician does for giving his 
advice to a patient. 

It would be inferred from Lord Derby’s letter, that 
Mr. Foster had invited his Lordship to dinner; but that 
was not strictly the fact. The circumstances were these. 
Mr. Foster had been asked by a gentleman who was 
desirous of testing the truth of Spiritualism to go to 
his house to have a seance on a particular day. The 
American medium declined, on the ground that he was 
engaged to go to Lord Derby’s house on that day. On 
learning this, Sir George Sinclair wrote to Lord Derby, 
congratulating him on being sufficiently recovered from 
a recent severe illness to receive Mr. Foster. Lord Derby 
misunderstood the American Spiritualist. Instead of his 
saying that he had invited Lord Derby to dinner, he 
said that he had been invited by Lord Derby to his house. 
This last statement w r as wholly untrue; Lord Derby 
knew nothing whatever of the American medium. It is 
fortunate he did not; for if he had been present at one 
of his seances , it would have proved a perfect California 
of wealth to the Yankee Spiritualist. He would have 
put announcements in all the papers next day that Lord 
Derby had become a “believer.” 


338 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I may here be permitted to mention, by way of 
parenthesis, in the interests of truth, that others of our 
great men have been set down by Spiritualists as having 
become converts to their views, and statements to that 
effect have appeared in the public papers, merely because 
they had attended one or more seances , solely for the pur¬ 
pose of investigation. Both the late Lord Brougham and 
Sir David Brewster were victims to this expedient on the 
part of the Spiritualists. This fact accords with my 
own private knowledge. Some ten or twelve years ago 
I was invited to meet Lord Brougham, Sir David 
Brewster, and other eminent men, at Ealing, at one of 
the seances of Mr. Home, who was then living there 
under the hospitable roof of a friend. The funeral of 
a relation which I had to attend on the same day, 
prevented my being present on that occasion. But 
because Lord Brougham and Sir David Brewster were 
present at this seance , at which Mr. Home was the hero 
of the evening, these eminent individuals were pro¬ 
claimed by such of the public journals as the Spiritualists 
had access to, as having been converted to Spiritualism. 
Now, there never was an assertion more at variance with 
the facts. With Lord Brougham I had the pleasure of 
being personally acquainted; and in private conversa¬ 
tion, as well as in letters, he assured me that so far 
from having any faith in Spiritualism, he wholly disbe¬ 
lieved in it, in the sense in which it was understood by 
those who called themselves Spiritualists. He admitted 
that there were certain phenomena which he could not 
understand, such as the rising of tables from the ground 
and then oscillating in the air—phenomena which I myself 
admit, because I have seen it—but he laughed to scorn 



SPIRITUALISM AND SPIRITUALISTS. 


339 


the idea that these phenomena were produced by spirits. 
He said to me in our private conversations on the 
subject that the phenomena which were witnessed were 
the result of some form or other of electricity with 
which we were yet unacquainted,—just as magnetism or 
mesmerism produced effects which were to us, in our 
present imperfect state of knowledge, incomprehensible. 

Nor did Lord Brougham confine his views on these 
points to his conversations with me, or to his corre¬ 
spondence by letters. He confided to my care elaborate 
articles for publication to the same effect; and to these 
I took care to give all the publicity which a morning 
journal of extensive circulation could insure them. 

With regard to Sir David Brewster, I can speak with 
equal certainty. He not only indignantly repudiated the 
idea that he had any faith whatever in Spiritualism, in 
the sense in which that term is usually understood, but 
he went further in his repudiation of that creed than 
even Lord Brougham did. In asking me to give pub¬ 
licity to his communications pronouncing Spiritualism to 
be an enormous delusion, he not only did not wish his 
name to be withheld from those communications, but, on 
the contrary, he put his name to each of them; and any 
one who may be curious to see these communications will 
find them, or rather, I should say, the more interesting 
portions of them, in Mr. Home’s work, published some 
years ago under the title of “ Incidents of My Life,”—to 
which work they were transferred from the morning 
journal in which I first gave them publicity. 

I will, I am sure, be pardoned if I allude for a moment 
to one more instance showing that Spiritualists are in the 
habit of claiming eminent men, without the slightest 




340 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


ground for so doing, as having become converts to tlieir 
creed. They have boldly and unblushingly affirmed that 
the late Lord Lyndhurst became, towards the close of 
his eventful and prolonged life, a firm believer in 
Spiritualism. I have never been able to understand 
on what definite fact, or conjunction of facts, they rested 
this assertion. They do not pretend that Lord Lynd¬ 
hurst became a disciple of Spiritualism many years before 
his death. Well, then, I have personal evidence of facts 
regarding the latter part of his life, which I hold to be 
demonstrably incompatible with the theory of his having 
then become a Spiritualist. Some time before he died—I 
will not specifically bind myself to dates—Lord Lyndhurst 
became a thoroughly converted man, in the strictest and 
most comprehensive sense in wdiich that phrase is un¬ 
derstood. I speak on the authority of the gentleman,—a 
man of the highest Christian character, as well as of the 
highest social position,—who was in constant attendance, 
as a spiritual counsellor, on Lord Lyndhurst during the 
last ten months of his life,—when I say that never did 
any man have clearer views of the great distinctive doc¬ 
trines of the Gospel, or a firmer or simpler faith in the 
finished work of Christ, as the only ground of hope for a 
happy eternity, than he had. And in that faith he died, 
as he had latterly lived, his last words being, “ I die 
supremely happy.” Now, I hold that it were a moral im¬ 
possibility for any one to be the earnest, simple-minded, 
thorough Christian, in the evangelical acceptation of the 
word, which Lord Lyndhurst most certainly was, to have 
been at the same time a Spiritualist, in the sense in 
which such men as our leading Spiritualists are ; for they 
are unbelievers in the chief doctrines of the Gospel, 





LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD DERBY. 


341 


and. do not attend places of Christian worship. I state 
these facts partly to show the groundlessness on which 
Spiritualists claim men to be among their number who 
not only never had the slightest sympathy with their 
sentiments, but were thoroughly opposed to them ; and 
partly with the view of pointing out that had Lord Derby 
invited the American Spiritualist to his house, as alluded 
to in his letter to Sir George Sinclair, or even attended 
one of his seances , he would have been set down as a 
Spiritualist of the first magnitude. 

The next letter from Lord Derby was written in acknow¬ 
ledgment of a small brochure , containing, in continuation 
of one that had been previously sent, an onslaught on 
Louis Napoleon. Sir George, as I have before stated, was 
a great supporter of the Legitimist cause in France, not¬ 
withstanding the prevailing Liberal tone of his political 
sentiments. In accordance with his Legitimist views, he 
invariably and strenuously advocated the restoration to 
the French throne, of the elder branch of the Bourbon 
family. This remark will explain an allusion in this 
letter of Lord Derby to Sir George :— 


Knowsley, Oct. 1st, 18G2. 

My dear Sir George, 

I have to thank you for your Second Philippic, which cer¬ 
tainly contains some (for some persons) very unpleasant truths. 
I have not much to say for the morality of either of the Revo¬ 
lutions, and certainly the present regime is not that which is most 
favourable to the tranquillity of the world at large ; but I may 
be permitted to doubt whether, as far as the interests of this 
country are concerned, we should find a more friendly feeling in 
consequence of the restoration of the elder branch. That, how¬ 
ever, is a matter on which it is useless to speculate; for I 
believe that party, of all in France, is the one whose ultimate 
success is the most improbable. 



342 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I am sorry to see that your printer has done you scant jus¬ 
tice, the misprints, especially in the quotations, are unpardon- 
ably numerous. 

In return for your Philippic, I will ask your acceptance of a 
small volume which I had privately printed in the summer— 
translations from various poems,, which I hope may afford you 
an hour’s amusement, and serve as a memorial of a now very 
old friend. I send it by book post. 

I am very sorry to hear you have been so severe a sufferer, 
but hope, from what you say, that your recovery, if slow, is now 
at least sure. 

Yours sincerely, 

Derby. 

Another letter of Lord Derby which I shall quote is 
dated “Knowsley, December 12, 1862.” Sir George 
occasionally, as the Christmas season approached, made 
his lordship a present of geese and whisky, and this 
letter in the first part of it makes a humorous acknow¬ 
ledgment of a present of that nature which had just been 
received. In relation to the whisky often spoken of in 
Scotland, as Lord Derby does in his letter, as “ mountain 
dew,” and which was so highly appreciated by all who 
were privileged to partake of it, I may remind my readers 
of an incident which occurred only two years ago. A 
vendor of whisky who, as the event proved, was a little 
too clever, hearing of Lord Derby's extreme illness at 
that time from a severe attack of the gout, sent him 
a small quantity of whisky, assuring his lordship that if 
he would only take at intervals the quantity so sent, it 
would not only infallibly cure him of the gout, but re¬ 
invigorate his whole constitution, and make him quite a 
new man. The empiric felt that if he could only get a 
single word from Lord Derby in praise of his whisky, it 
would be the making of a moderate fortune, because of 


LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD DERBY. 


343 


tlie way in which he could turn it to account. Lord 
Derby, however, took no notice of either the whisky 
sent or the person sending it. In a week or ten days 
after this the gratifying announcement was made in all 
the public journals that the severe attack of the gout 
from which Lord Derby had suffered so much had sub¬ 
sided, and that he might, indeed, be said to be conva¬ 
lescent. On this the London whisky dealer wrote again 
to Lord Derby, expressing his great pleasure at his 
recovery, assuming it was the result of his whisky, and 
asking his lordship to be good enough to say what he 
thought of the whisky. Annoyed by the importunities 
of the empiric, and seeing that his object was to get his 
lordship’s testimony to the superiority of his whisky, 
he wrote this laconic note to him:—“ I beg to inform 
you that I prefer the gout to your whisky.” Had Lord 
Derby, in the plentitude of an unsusjhcious nature, said a 
single word in praise of the whisky, there can be no doubt 
that the public journals would have forthwith teemed with 
certificates from Lord Derby to the matchless merits of 
this person’s “ mountain dew,”—just as the mythical 
Earl of Old town is made to testify by advertisements 
in every part of the globe where the English language 
is read, to the marvellous efficacy of a notable ointment, 
as shown in its having restored his shrunk-up leg to its 
original size, appearance, and functions. But with 
regard to the whisky which Sir George sent as a pre¬ 
sent to Lord Derby, and the quality of which the latter 
extols so highly, it is due to its manufacturer to state 
that it was the product of Mr. Swanson, of the Garston 
Distillery, Caithness. 

There is a reference in this letter of Lord Derby, 



344 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


as there was in one before, to the badness of Mr. 
Gruineson’ s handwriting. Mr. Gruineson, one of Sir 
George’s intimate friends, is well known in the literary 
and operatic world. As a musical critic he has perhaps 
no superior. More than thirty years’ intimate acquaint¬ 
ance with Mr. Graineson’s handwriting enables me to 
confirm the justice of Lord Derby’s remark with regard 
to its badness, but my own is so like it in that respect, 
that I am not in a position to condemn the penmanship 
of any one. Lord Derby, however, had a perfect right 
to do so, for even up till the time of the illness which 
terminated in his death, he wrote a singularly neat, 
—indeed, beautiful hand, without erasures or interlinea¬ 
tions. T subjoin the letter to Sir George Sinclair, to 
which these observations apply :— 


Knowsley, Dec. 12th, 1862. 


Dear Sir George, 

I delayed thanking you, in Lady Derby’s name, for the geese 
and mountain dew, till I could tell you that they have been 
subjected to the criticism of the Duke of Cambridge and a 
party who have been sporting here; and I am happy to be able 
to announce that the verdict was triumphantly in their favour. 
The “ dew ” especially was thought so highly of, that I should 
take it as a favour if you can and will purchase for me a case of 
the same quality, say about two dozen bottles, and I will pay 
you like an honest man. 

Your friend Mr. Gruineson is an excellent man, but he 
writes an execrable hand. I have, however, deciphered his 
amusing letter, which, as you do not want it back, I will 
destroy. I think he exaggerates the state of things in France, 
though I have no doubt that the Mazzinian party are actively 
at work, and that plots are rife, which try the vigilance of the 
police and the nerves of the Emperor. He seems, however to 
have got very successfully through the opening of the new 




THE LATE LADY CAMILLA SINCLAIR. 


345 


Boulevard, and to have taken the opportunity of very artfully 
flattering the masses. 

Thanks for what you are doing for the Lancashire distress. 

Yours sincerely, 

Derby. 


I will give only one more of Lord Derby’s numerous 
letters to Sir George. It chiefly relates to the bereave¬ 
ment which Sir George sustained in 1863 in the death 
of Lady Camilla Sinclair. Nothing could be more 
delicate or touching than the way in which Lord Derby 
alludes to that dispensation of Providence. The letter is 
dated— 


St. James’s Square, April 12th, 1863. 

My dear Sir George, 


I had seen in the papers the account of your heavy domestic 
affliction, but had not liked to obtrude upon you at so early a 
period with any expression of my feelings for you ; but the 
receipt from you, at Tunbridge Wells, of the lines written a few 
years ago, and now reprinted, afford me an excuse for saying 
how sincerely I sympathize in your sorrow, though I had not 
the honour of a personal acquaintance with her whom you have 
lost. I have always thought that to the survivor of those who 
have enjoyed a long life of married happiness, the best consola¬ 
tion, next to the conviction of the assured happiness of the 
departed, must be the knowledge that in the course of nature 
the separation cannot be for a very lengthened period. 

Whatever other or better comfort you are capable of re¬ 
ceiving under such a bereavement, may He give you, who 
only can ! 

Ever yours sincerely, 


Derby. 


Nothing could surpass this in fine feeling, and I can 
well conceive how highly it must have been appreciated 
by Sir George’s sensitive heart. The lines to which Lord 
Derby alludes in relation to Lady Camilla, eight years 
before her death, are as follows :— 



346 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


LADY CAMILLA SINCLAIR. 

A graceful tree adorn’d the shelter’d glade, 

In Nature’s choicest livery richly clad, 

Whole years I bask’d beneath its kindly shade, 

In moods and moments both serene and sad. 

Winter’s chill blast has marr’d its bending form. 

Its precious fruits are few and far between ; 

Fresh boughs are shiver’d by each piercing storm, 
Its leaves are yellow,—once so brightly green. 

The tott’ring trunk is dearer to my heart 

Than youthful stems which deck the sloping hill ; 

Their vernal beauties no such charm impart, 

As in my soul’s fond record linger still. 

Thurso Castle, Dec. 5th, 1855. 


Of the character of the lady of whom these lines, 
beautiful alike for their poetry and feeling, were written, 
I shall have occasion to speak hereafter. 

In closing the references which I have thus made to 
the letters which Lord Derby wrote to Sir George Sin¬ 
clair, I cannot refrain from giving the remarkable words, 
—announcing the close of his public career, one of the 
most brilliant on record—which he uttered in his speech 
on the Irish Church question towards the end of last ses¬ 
sion, and which were sadly prophetic of his early death : 
—“ My Lords,” said the venerable Peer, hardly able to 
support himself while he spoke, “ My Lords, I am an old 
man, and, like many of your Lordships, have passed the 
allotted three-score years and ten. My official life is over. 
My political life is well nigh closed, and my natural life 
cannot long continue. My Lords, my natural life con- 
menced with the suppression of a formidable rebellion in 
Ireland, preceding the Union of the two countries. May 
God grant that at the close of that life I may not witness 
a renewal of the one and a dissolution of the other. I 




LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD ASHBURTON. 


347 


cannot pretend to read the future, but whatever may be 
the issue of this great controversy, whatever the result of 
your Lordships’ determination with regard to this 
measure, I shall, for my own part, even if it be the last 
time I have the honour of addressing your Lordships, 
feel satisfaction to my dying day, that I have been able 
to lift up my voice against the adoption of a measure the 
political folly of which is only equalled by its moral 
delinquency.” 

There was not one that heard Lord Derby express 
himself in this most touching language, that was not 
more or less deeply affected. The words were spoken 
on the 18th of June : he ceased to exist in this lower 
sphere on the 23rd of October, amidst the deep regret of 
all classes of the community. 

There are many letters from members of the House of 
Lords to Sir George Sinclair, which would well deserve a 
place in this volume could the requisite space be spared, 
but I am obliged, for want of such space, to be contented 
with a few. There is one from the late Lord Ashburton, 
which happens to possess an exceptional interest at the 
present time, because it chiefly refers to the question of our 
monetary system, which, if certain indications are to be 
relied on, is about to be again brought before the public 
and parliament. Lord Ashburton was a strenuous advo¬ 
cate for a metallic currency, while the Mr. Attwood to 
Avhom he refers as the correspondent of Sir George, was 
the head of the then Birmingham Monetary School, whose 
great principle, as lately mentioned, was a paper currency, 
going down in value so low as one-pound notes. The 
letter, it will be seen, was written just a quarter of a 
century ago. 


348 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Piccadilly, 21st May, 1844. 

My dear Sir George, 

It gave me great satisfaction to find your kind note on 
returning to town from an absence of a few days in Hampshire, 
and to have signs of life, though from the mountains of the 
north, of one who formerly contributed so much by his wisdom 
and good sense to keep our reasoning powers right. I was 
sorry to learn that cares and suffering had determined your 
retreat from the active world. Permit me, as the suggestion of 
age and experience, to say that in this you are wrong: our best 
chance of comfort and happiness is to fight against cares, and 
by a life of usefulness to be benefiting, and to think we are 
benefiting, the world we are living in. 

I continue to work in this place though burdened with many 
more years than you, and I have become pamphleteer to 
endeavour to keep us out of the monetary difficulties in which 
we are once more involved. I conclude from the date of your 
note that you cannot have seen my attempt, and I therefore 
send you a copy. Your correspondent, Mr. Attwood, is evidently 
an able man and an original thinker, and I should be very 
happy to make his acquaintance if, when in town, he would do 
me the favour to call. The name is that of what my friends 
the Americans call a very talented family, but you will see that 
I am far from agreeing with them in their paper theories, 
which, however, they defend with great ability. My object in 
publishing was to combat the Charter Act of 1844, and I 
believe the opinion of the country is coming round to me in 
this point. You are, I think, unnecessarily alarmed about the 
Emperor Nicolas. I have no fear of him whatever, either in his 
character of autocrat or stock-jobber. 

I am, my dear Sir George, 

Yours, most truly, 

Ashburton. 

With Lord Lyndlmrst Sir George Sinclair was, at one 
time, on terms of intimacy, and a mutual friendship was 
kept up till near the close of the life of the former. I do 
not find that Sir George had preserved many of Lord 
Lyndhurst’s letters to him ; but there are two that were 


LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD LYNDHURST. 


349 


evidently written when lie was drawing towards the 
close of life. They are both very brief, and do not 
possess any other interest than that which arises from 
the fact that they were written a short time before the 
end of his career. But though there are no dates to 
either so far as regards the years in which they were 
written, both have the dates of the month. The one 
which was evidently the first written is dated “ George 
Street, March 13,”—George Street, Hanover Square, 
being Lord Lyndhurst’s residence. It is as follows :— 
My dear Sir George, 

I have read your letters with great interest. They fall in 
with my views as to “ our great ally.” The effect of that 
alliance is to separate us from the West of Europe, and to 
subject us to constant mortification, in finding counsels ne¬ 
glected and our policy thwarted. When the settlement of Italy 
is completed, what is to come next ? His motto is, “ one 
thing at a time, but all in succession.” I am still alive, but 
not much more, and greatly flattered to be kindly remembered 
by you. 

Ever faithfully yours, 

Lyndhurst. 

It will be seen from this letter, not only that the mind 
of Lord Lyndhurst was as clear and vigorous as ever, 
notwithstanding that he had by this time considerably 
passed the octogenarian period of life, but that his views 
in relation to the impolicy of our alliance with Louis 
Napoleon, and consequent loss of prestige among the 
nations of the world, coincided with those of Sir George 
Sinclair,—a circumstance which must have been ex¬ 
ceedingly gratifying to the latter. 

Lord Lyndhurst refers in the above mentioned letter to 
the illness under which he was then labouring, as he 
had been for some time before ; but it is only from 



350 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


the next letter, dated “ George Street, May 6,” that 
we learn how serious his illness had become. Consti¬ 
tutionally he was a man remarkable for his flow of 
spirits, which never left him in his old age until attacked 
by the illness which ended in his death. We can there¬ 
fore safely infer how exceedingly ill he must have been 
when he writes to Sir George that he was “ unable to 
attend to anything either amusing or instructive.” This 
is manifestly the language of one who was so exhausted 
with sickness as to be scarcely able to hold a pen. 

I am inclined, indeed, to think, from some circum¬ 
stances connected with Lord Lyndhurst’s last illness 
which came to my knowledge at the time, that the short 
letter to Sir George Sinclair was among the last he 
wrote to any one outside the circle of his special friends. 
The following is the letter, which is written in as fine 
a hand as if the writer had only been in his thirtieth 
instead of his ninetieth year :— 

George Street, May 6. 

My dear Sir George, 

I have been confined by severe indisposition for the last four 
months, and am still a sufferer, and unable to attend to any¬ 
thing either amusing or instructive. Thanks for your note and 
its accompaniment. 

Very faithfully yours, 

Lyndhurst. 

In connection with the illness which preceded the 
death of Lord Lyndhurst, I am able to state, on the 
authority of a gentleman, than whom, as I have men¬ 
tioned in a previous page, no one stands higher in the re¬ 
ligious world, and who visited him twice a week, for two 
or three hours each time, for a period of ten months prior 
to his death,—that so profoundly had his mind become 




LETTER FROM THE LATE LORD BROUGHAM. 3f»l 

impressed with the paramount importance of the things 
of eternity, that he showed no inclination to converse on 
other topics. The gentleman to whom I allude—one in 
the same high social position as himself—told me that, 
again and again he had seen numbers of noblemen and 
other distinguished persons waiting in an ante-room to 

see the venerable invalid, but that under no circum- 

♦ 

stances was any person, no matter how high might be 
his rank, admitted while he was engaged with the noble 
sufferer in spiritual conversation. And when others 
were admitted, Lord Lyndhurst made a point of directing 
their attention to the great verities of the Gospel. 
Again and again did he endeavour to get Lord Brougham, 
who visited him often, to engage in conversation on 
divine things, but never with success. Lord Brougham 
on all such occasions evaded every effort made by Lord 
Lyndhtirst to enlighten or advise him in relation to the 
one thing needful,—that one thing without which there 
can be no happiness hereafter, but where there will 
inevitably be the reverse. Lord Lyndhurst thus con¬ 
tinued to speak religiously to those who came to see 
him, until enfeebled nature was no longer capable of the 
effort. He died, as already mentioned, in the ninetieth 
year of his age. 

Were I to give a place in these pages to all the letters 
from Peers of the Realm which I have found among the 
papers of Sir George Sinclair, their insertion would 
occupy an undue amount of my remaining space. I will 
therefore confine my publication of this class of letters to 
one more; and that one letter proceeded from the pen of 
one, in some respects the most remarkable man of his age. 
Having said this, it will, I doubt not, be at once inferred 




352 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


that I allude to the late Lord Brougham. His character 
is so well known that no preliminary observations are 
needed in introducing a letter from him. The letter 
chiefly relates to the question of Poor Laws for Scot¬ 
land,—a question at that time, 1847, exciting much 
attention on the other side of the Tweed. Lord 

Brougham alludes to a letter from the late Dr. Chalmers, 

» 

which Sir George forwarded along; with one from him- 
self,—in which the Doctor had been contending for the 
right of the ministers and members of the National 
Church of Scotland to be exempted from the jurisdiction 
of the Civil Courts in matters purely spiritual. Lord 
Brougham, who had no Scriptural views with regard to 
the constitution of a Church professing to be Christian, 
could not at all understand how a man of Dr. Chalmers’ 
great mind could have the slightest scruples about sub¬ 
mitting to the interference of the Courts of Law in 
ecclesiastical matters, just as readily as in civil affairs. 
This statement is necessary to explain Lord Brougham’s 
surprise at the part of Dr. Chalmers’ letter to Sir George 
Sinclair, which refers to the subject in question. 

Grafton Street, July 22, 1847. 

My dear Sir George, 

I am much obliged to you for your over kind though melan¬ 
choly letter, and the very curious one of my old and valued 
friend Dr. Chalmers. Agreeing heartily with him on the Poor 
Law question, I marvel at his language about the Free Church, 
and he seems himself aware of its extravagance. 

As for the Poor Law question, I once used to think that in 
England the maximum plan you allude to would do, but we 
w r ere driven from that. The evil is that the population and 
idleness will always go on increasing as long as any provision is 
made by law for feeding the people, and they will not attend to 
a maximum of which they cannot feel the justice. 




LORD BROUGHAM. 


353 


We are in a great puzzle in Parliament—on tlie Irish Poor 
Law question, of course; and how we are to deal with it I know 
not. The House of Commons is in the hands of an incapable 
ministry of the mob. If the Lords do not act at once, rising 
and meeting the state of things boldly, evil days will come. 

Yours, truly, 

H. Brougham. 

It will be observed tliat instead of signing liimself 

O O 

“ Brougham and Vaux,” Lord Brougham here signs 
himself “ H. Brougham/’—his signature before he was 
made a Peer of the Realm. This was a very common 
thing with him, just as it was to address all his more 
intimate friends by the initials only of their Christian 
name, as he does in this letter to Sir George. Until 
within a year of his death, which took place in 1868 , in 
the eighty-ninth year of his age, Lord Brougham was, as 
I can testify from personal observation, as buoyant and 
full of playfulness as if only a boy who had just entered 
his teens. 


CHAPTEE XV. 


Letters from Members of the House of Commons—Letter from Sir James 
Mackintosh to Lady Camilla Sinclair—Letters to Sir George Sinclair from 
the late William Wilberforce—The late Sir Robert Peel—Sir Robert Inglis 
—Sir James Graham—Mr. Disraeli. 

In my previous chapter I have given a few of the 
letters which Sir George Sinclair had preserved out of 
the many he had received from friends who were Peers 
of the Realm. I find a large volume, as I stated before, 
among his extensive collections of correspondence with 
public men, consisting exclusively of letters from members 
of the House of Commons. These are so numerous, and 
some of them so lengthened, that were they all to be 
given, they would make a moderately sized volume of 
themselves. Under the circumstances I must content 
myself with a few selections. 

%y 

The first letter I shall present to the public is 
from the late Sir James Mackintosh, one of the most 
learned Members of Parliament in his day. This 
letter, I ought to remark, was not addressed to Sir 
George himself but to Lady Camilla Sinclair, then 
Mrs. Sinclair ; but that is too trivial a circumstance to 
prevent its appearing under the above heading. It 
presents the writer in a very amiable light,—rather more 
so, indeed, than that in which, in his day, most people 
regarded him; for he was generally looked upon as 



LETTER FROM SIR JAMES MACKINTOSH. 


355 


one who was somewhat of a hard, dry member of the 
political school of philosophy. But this letter is calcu¬ 
lated to remove that impression, where it may still exist. 
It is full of fine feeling, especially in that part of it in 
which the writer describes his second visit to the grave 
of the poet Cowper, of whom he speaks in the highest 
terms. The letter, which will be read with much in¬ 
terest, is dated—• 

Harrogate, August 21, 1825. 

My dear Mrs. Sinclair, 

I am much gratified by any proof of your remembrance, and 
I flatter myself with the hope that you will not be displeased to 
hear of the very good effect of the water and its accompani¬ 
ments on my health. I feel a great change, and it seems to he 
visible to others. I am sorry that we are at such a distance 
from your family as to see little of them. I do not visit. Lady 
Sinclair has been exceedingly kind to my daughter, who, as her 
mother is not here, needs the patronage of a matron. 

I am sorry that I did not exactly know the residence of my 
shipmate, Sir Dudley, on the 14th of last month, when my 
daughter and I must have gone near, if not through Emberton, 
on our way from Ampthill to Olney, where we passed that burn¬ 
ing day amidst the memorials of poor Cowper. We were 
much interested by all that reminded us of the most remarkable 
union of genius, virtue, and misery that, I believe, ever was 
known. Five and twenty years ago I visited Olney, with the 
same purpose, and I then observed that those who had come 
into contact with the gentle poet were Cowper-ised. One of 
them I found active, vigorous, and cheerful. He had been 
Cowper’s barber. He remembered my former visit, and gra¬ 
tified me by showing, as well as saying, that he had watched my 
progress ever since. In bidding farewell your young admiral 
would not be injured by comparing the life and the poems of 
Cowper with the scenes of Olney and Weston. It is a natural and 
sometimes useful feeling that induces us in such cases to ask, 

If of the modest mansion aught remains 

Where heaven and nature prompted Cowper’s strains ? 

A A 2 


35G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I am glad to hear that the Arctic Ocean strengthens you. 
Mr. Sinclair has now nothing to fear from the Norse Sea Kings, 
who, four or five centuries ago, would have thought you “ good 
prize.” Are there iy or many names of places in Caithness 
derived from the C elic ? Can your Leicestershire ears dis¬ 
tinguish the Caithness Scotch from that of the South \ In an 

O 

old list of Commissioners of Supply for Caithness, I find the 
name of Groat. I fear he has left no memorial but John o’ 
Groat’s House. This twaddling will show you that my sense 
is attracted by trifles in the place where you are. With kindest 
regards to Mr. Sinclair, I am, my dear Mrs. Sinclair, 

Very truly yours, 

Jas. Mackintosh. 


Another friend of Sir George Sinclair distinguished, 
not as a Member of Parliament only, but as a philan¬ 
thropist and religious man, was Mr. William Wilberforce. 
From him, among other letters, Sir George received the 
following. The letter, it will be seen, is in keeping with 
the religious fervour which habitually burned in his 
bosom, and the intense benevolence which invariably 
marked the career of the great abolisher of the Slave 
Trade. The letter of Mr. Wilberforce to Sir George is 
dated— 


My dear Sir, 


Highwood Hill, Middlesex, 

3rd February, 1829. 


Again, and again, and again it has been flashing across my 
mind for a year or more, that I never returned any answer to a 
very kind letter which I received from you; and if you had for¬ 
gotten that a complaint in my eyes allows me to write but little 
compared with the claims on my pen, and scarcely to read at 
all, you might have misconstrued my silence. At last, there¬ 
fore, having occasion to answer a very obliging communication 
from my old friend your father, I am prompted to address a 
few lines to his son also. 

Let me assure you that, though I have given no proofs of 



LETTER FROM MR. WILLIAM WILBERFORCE. 


357 


your occupying a place in my remembrance, your image lias 
often recurred to me ; and I learned, with no little pleasure, 
that you were devoting your time and talents to beneficial pur¬ 
suits ; in particular, one, the excellent tendency of which I 
cannot doubt, though I cannot judge how far your object can 
be effected—that of providing for the supply of good ministers 
to the Church of Scotland. 

I hoped to visit your country last summer, but was compelled 
very reluctantly to abandon the design, by finding it absolutely 
necessary to my success in endeavouring to obtain permission 
to build and have the patronage of a chapel of ease near my 
own house, that I should remain near London, till it became 
too late for a northern tour. Of all the motives which prompted 
me to the expedition, the most powerful perhaps was the wish 
to become better acquainted with Dr. Chalmers, whom I al¬ 
ready know enough highly to esteem and love. 

Mrs. Wilberforce, who knows that my bodily frame is of a 
weakly texture, is much afraid of my subjecting myself to any 
of the changes which travelling necessarily involves, so that, 
whether or not I may ever be able to see Scotland must be 
quite uncertain. I rejoice, however, to think that it is partaking of 
the improvement which I trust is still going on in this country, 
after having been already so great during the last forty or fifty 
years. May it please God, my dear Sir, to enable you to con¬ 
tribute to this improvement; may He grant you, if it be His 
will, a long course of usefulness, comfort, and honour, and may 
you at length have an abundant entrance into that better 
world, where holiness and happiness shall be complete and 
eternal. 

With every kind wish, I remain, my dear Sir, 

Yours very sincerely, 

W. Wilberforce. 


P.S.—Do not write to me out of form, but when you can 
give me any information, especially of a religious kind, which 
will not be contained in our public prints, you will do me a 
favour by communicating it. You may always write to me 
under cover of the Hon. Frederick Calthorpe. 


35S MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Those who have read what I have written in my first 
chapter will not need to be told anew of the fact that Sir 
Robert Peel and Sir George Sinclair were friends as well 
as schoolfellows at Harrow. Sir Robert Peel, in early as 
well as in later life, was devoid of anything like warm¬ 
hearted friendship. He was constitutionally cold and 
reserved in his manner, even to his school acquaintances, 
and that was equally his characteristic in public life. 
There never was any real cordiality on his part towards 
any even of his most strenuous and steadfast supporters, 
when he was Prime Minister. All of them complained 
of his haughty bearing and distant demeanour as the 
leader of his party. A striking instance of his haughti¬ 
ness of manner was once furnished by a little incident 
which took place in the lobby of the House of Commons. 
A well-known and good-natured member of that House, 
about a quarter of a century ago,— one who, from his 
open manner and great kindness of heart, was a favourite 
with all the members of the House at that time,—hap¬ 
pened one evening to meet Sir Robert Peel in the lobby 
while he was coming out, and in the exuberance of 
his goodnature gave Sir Robert a gentle slap on the 
shoulder, saying, in the Paul Bedford style, then so com¬ 
mon, “Holloa, Peel, how are you, my boy?” Sir Robert, 
instead of taking the salutation as a good-natured, harm¬ 
less act, did not utter a word, but pulled himself up, and 
with an indignant frown, as if the other had meant to 
affront him, walked away in his wonted stately style. 
That was exactly the man. No one dared to use the 
slightest familiarity with him, even when they were most 
steadily supporting him in crises of his Administration. 
He had his large majorities at particular periods of his 


THE LATE SIR ROBERT PEEL. 


359 


Premiership, but lie never bad a single real personal 
friend among the number. 

In perfect accordance with this view of the character of 
Sir Bobert Peel, I find the numerous letters to Sir George 
Sinclair, which Sir George has preserved. Probably of 
all his acquaintances there was no one whose character 
he more admired than he did that of the subject of these 
Memoirs. I see, from various letters, that in special 
emergencies, particularly in relation to ecclesiastical 
matters connected with the Church of Scotland, he 
was more unreserved in his correspondence with Sir 
George than with any other person, and that he at¬ 
tached more importance to his principles and conduct 
than to those of any other man on either side of 
the Tweed. At least, all the information I have been 
able to obtain on the point, conducts me to that conclu¬ 
sion. Still there was something which had a freezing 
effect in all his correspondence, so far as Sir Bobert’s 
letters have been preserved by Sir George. As the great 
majority of the letters of the former to the latter were in 
connection with the Church of Scotland previous to the 
disruption which took place in 1843, and as the interest 
of that great ecclesiastical event, so far as regards con¬ 
versation in society on it, has passed away, I will not 
extract any of Sir Bobert Peel's letters to Sir George 
Sinclair from that part of his correspondence. But there 
is one of Sir Bobert s letters to Sir George which is 
clothed with great constitutional interest, which it would 
be an unpardonable omission were I not to give it a place 
in this volume. 

It will be in the distinct remembrance of those who 
were in the habit of paying attention to political ques- 


3G0 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


tions thirty years ago, that in the year 1839 the then 
Melbourne Ministry were defeated in the House of Com¬ 
mons on what was called the Jamaica question, by a 
combination on the part of the Conservatives, headed by 
Sir Robert Peel, and the Radicals, partly, on that parti¬ 
cular occasion, led by Mr. Joseph Hume. The majority 
against the Government was only two or three votes,— I 
do not, at the moment, remember the precise number. 
Lord Melbourne, acting in consonance with the constitu¬ 
tional custom of calling on the party who had headed 
the fight which ended in the defeat of the previous 
Ministry, to undertake the task of forming a new one, 
advised her Majesty to send for Sir Robert Peel, and 
give him her commands to form a new Cabinet. Sir 
Robert was accordingly sent for, and undertook the task. 
In a few days he had, as he believed, succeeded, but after 
mentioning to her Majesty the names of the intended 
members of his Government, a hitch occurred, and from 
a cause altogether unexpected. Her Majesty having 
acquiesced in Sir Robert’s intended appointments in 
relation to those who were to constitute his Cabinet, he 
remarked, addressing the Queen, “ We now come to 
those who are to constitute the ladies of your Majesty’s 
Court. I would suggest that the Duchess of So-and-so, 
the Marchioness of So-and-so, the Countess of So-and-so, 
should fill particular positions about the person of your 
Majesty.” “ Oh,” said the Queen, “ I should wish my 
present ladies to retain their places. I am attached 
to them, and would be unwilling to part with them.” 
Sir Robert Peel urged, of course in the most defe¬ 
rential manner, that it was necessary that there should 
be the changes he proposed, because if the wives and 


LORD MELBOURNE AND A NEW MINISTRY. 


301 


daughters of liis political rivals were still to remain 
a,bout the person of her Majesty, the circumstance would 
be very disadvantageous to any Government which he 
might form, as they would naturally take advantage 
of their position to furnish their husbands and fathers 
with whatever information they obtained at Court, to the 
prejudice of his Administration. The Queen, however, 
would not consent to have her ladies of the bedchamber, 
and other situations at Court, superseded by others. On 
finding this, Sir Robert, representing anew to her Majesty 
what he regarded as the improbability of his being able 
to carry on a Government with honour to himself or 
advantage to the country, unless the changes in question 
were acquiesced in by the Queen,—relinquished the task 
of forming a new Ministry. 

In this state of matters, Lord Melbourne was again 
sent for by her Majesty, who expressed her desire that he 
and his late colleagues should withdraw their resignations 
and resume the discharge of the duties of the offices they 
had before respectively filled. As the majority against 
them was, as I have stated, only two or three, Lord 
Melbourne complied with the Queen’s wishes. The Mel¬ 
bourne Ministry were accordingly reinstated, or rather 
reinstated themselves, having before brought over as 
many of those of the Liberals who had previously voted 
against them, as would insure a reversal of the decision 
which had led to their resignation. Among these who 
usually voted with them before, and voted with them on 
this occasion, was Mr. Joseph Hume. He, however, it is 
right to say, changed his vote from no private considera¬ 
tions, but because Lord Melbourne, through the Minis¬ 
terial leader in the House of Commons, gave him a 



3G2 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


pledge that if they remained in office they would give 
him what was always an object dear to his heart,—a 
penny postage. That he deemed a good which immea¬ 
surably outweighed in importance the point involved in 
the Jamaica question, on which he had voted against the 
Melbourne Ministry. 

These remarks are necessary to render intelligible the 
letter, which I now subjoin, of Sir Bobert Peel to Sir 
George Sinclair. 

Drayton Manor, Oct. 30th, 1839. 

My dear Sinclair, 

I am always obliged to you for the free and unreserved com¬ 
munication of your opinions on political matters, and always 
give to them, from my conviction of their disinterestedness and 
sincerity, full consideration. You will, I have no doubt, feel that 
it must be quite out of my power to decide now on the course 
which it may be advisable to pursue on the occasion of the meet¬ 
ing of Parliament, which will not probably take place until three 
months hence. I thank you for the extracts you have been 
good enough to send me from the letters which you have 
received from correspondents of opposite political opinions. I do 
not think there is much weight in their observations, assuming 
that you and I are right in thinking that it would have been 
dishonourable in a public man to undertake the government of 
this country with the express understanding that the wives and 
daughters of his political rivals and opponents were to occuj)y 
the chief female appointments about the Court. 

The parliamentary policy framed last session did actually lead 
to that summum bonum which your correspondents so ardently 
desire,—the expulsion of the Government. The failure to form 
another Government was solely attributable to the demand which 
we think ought not to have been acceded to. Whatever letter 
writers or newspaper writers may say, that was the single cause 
of this failure. That cause would, I apprehend, have existed 
in equal force, whether the Ministers had retired on the 
Jamaica question, or in consequence of any other vote carried 
by the union of Conservatives and Badicals. 



SIR ROBERT INGLIS. 


303 


Your Radical correspondent I do not comprehend. He blames 
us for “ throwing difficulties in the way of the Ministry for party 
objects.” I thought his accusation was that party objects and 
interests had been too much overlooked, and that sufficient dif¬ 
ficulties had not been thrown in the way of the Ministry. Pro¬ 
bably the motion which he would have thought a perfect speci¬ 
men of public spirit and disinterestedness, would have been 
denounced by half the Conservatives, as a “ motion throwing 
difficulties in the way of the Ministry for party objects.” 

Ever yours, my dear Sir, 

R. Peel. 

It will be seen from this letter of Sir Robert Peel how 
highly lie valued the good opinion of Sir George Sinclair. 
During the following two years, the Conservative party 
had been steadily gaining new seats in the House of 
Commons by those single elections which are always 
occurring. By the end of that time Sir Robert Peel, as 
the leader of the Conservatives, had obtained a sufficient 
majority to render it impossible for the Whigs to carry 
on the Government. They accordingly resigned, and Sir 
Robert Peel again received her Majesty’s commands to 
form a new Ministry. He obeyed the Queen’s commands 
without, on this occasion, stipulating for the supercession 
of the ladies of her Court by other ladies of his own 
political views. 

Among others of Sir George Sinclair’s friends, parlia¬ 
mentary as well as private, it would not be right to omit 
an allusion to Sir Robert Inglis. Sir Robert was a most 
estimable man. He was the very impersonation of good 
nature. His very face was radiant with it. His coun¬ 
tenance, in fact, beamed so brightly with all that was 
expressive of cheerfulness and benevolence, that it did 
one’s heart good to look upon it. It was enough to 


304 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

reconcile those to human nature, who had hitherto been 
hostile to it. Mr. O’Connell used to express the pleasure 
it gave him, amidst all the unkindly feelings so often 
engendered in the heat of party collision, to look to one 
happy, benignant countenance,—the countenance of the 
Member for the University of Oxford,—which Sir Robert 
Inglis then was. I remember, on one occasion, Mr. O’Con¬ 
nell speaking of Sir Robert as possessing the sleekest, 
the fattest, and happiest countenance he ever saw. Sir 
Robert was so devotedly attached to the Church of 
England, that he had hardly a thought beyond her 
interests. Indeed, there was a sense in which his exist¬ 
ence may have been said to have been bound up with 
hers. 

One of his great peculiarities was his passion for 
street-music. Itinerant musicians were with him the 
greatest of mankind. I have myself seen him manifestly 
lost in the excess of his admiration of their musical 
achievements. Grisi and Alboni were the deities of his 
day in the operatic world, but their singing was un¬ 
worthy of the name compared with that which regaled 
his ear in the public streets. 

The following is one of Sir Robert Inglis s letters to 
Sir George. The part relative to the communication 
from Mr. Attwood to Sir George, which the latter had 
transmitted to Sir Robert, had for its object to procure 
the repeal of Peel’s Bill of 1844, and to substitute for a 
metallic a paper currency. Mr. Richard Spooner, to 
whom reference is made in Sir Robert’s letter, shared Mr. 
Attwood s views on that question, and so did Sir George, 
as his father, Sir John Sinclair, had done before him. 
Almost all the Scotch Members were equally in favour of 



LETTER FROM SIR ROBERT INGLIS. 


365 


a one-pound paper currency, because they found, as they 
still find, the great benefits of which it was, and is, pro¬ 
ductive. The part in the letter of Sir Bobert Inglis 
which alludes to the then impending general election, 
shows that he possessed more playfulness than the world 
gave him credit for :— 


7, Bedford Square, May 3rd, 1847. 

My dear Sir George, 

It is a pleasure to me to have any intercourse with you, 
even in the imperfect form of a letter: it will be a far greater 
pleasure once more to shake you by the hand heartily. 

Your letter of the 26th is marked late by the post office, and, 
at any rate, whatever and wherever may have been the cause of 
the delay, I am now taking the earliest opportunity of thanking 
you for it, and acknowledging the kind confidence on your part 
which induced you to entrust to me Mr. Charles Attwood’s 
letter, herewith returned. Almost the same words had already 
been addressed, direct to myself, by Mr. Bichard Spooner, but I 
did not feel prepared to take any part in the matter—difficult in 
1819, and trebly difficult now, if it be proposed to retrace the 
steps of that year. In perfect confidence I will say to you that 
I do not think the individuals in either house to whom you have 
already communicated Mr. Attwood’s former paper, are likely to 
carry much weight. I am conscious that I am taking a liberty 
with you in thus opposing your judgment, but I say it lest my 
silence might imply assent. 

The coming elections will be among the most curious ever 
known, inasmuch as there is not only no watchword of party, 
but not even any one stirring question yet before us. Whigs 
and Tories, Badicals and Conservatives, will in vain be sought 
for. Whigs, perhaps, which in 1841 seemed to be as much ex¬ 
tinct as the Icthyosauri or Plesiosauri, may be found in some 
strata; but confidence in public men is lost; and, if Astrea be 
to be seen on earth, it must be in some such place as Thurso 
Castle, with nothing but the Frozen Ocean beyond, but certainly 
not in these latitudes. It will, I repeat it, give me the sincerest 
pleasure to see you again. May God sanctify all your sorrows 


306 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


to you; in this, at least, I am in earnest, whatever you may 
have thought of the close of the last page. 

Ever yours, 

Robert H. Inglis. 

Sir James Graham was another of Sir George Sinclair's 
parliamentary friends. For many years there was a 
special intimacy between them; while, so far as relates 
to written correspondence, I am not sure whether Sir 
George received a greater number of letters from any one 
of his legislative acquaintances, with one exception—that 
of Sir Francis Burdett—than he did from Sir James 
Graham. The latter was so well known in his day, and 
even the present generation are so conversant with the 
latter part of his public career, that none of the leading 
incidents in it need be adverted to. But those of the 
present day are not all acquainted with the fact that 
he commenced public life as one of the most ultra of 
ultra-Liberals. In making a speech at a public meeting 
in the year 1830, immediately after the overthrow of the 
Polignac Administration in France, and the consequent 
flight of Charles the Tenth from that country, Sir James 
Graham gave expression to a hope that the head of every 
European monarch who sought to reign unconstitution¬ 
ally would soon be seen rolling on the scaffold. Within 
five years of the time at which these words were spoken, 
Sir James Graham was found a seceder from the Liberal 
Government of Lord Grey, and in less than three years 
more he came before the public a full-fledged Conserva¬ 
tive,—a term which at that time was more expressive of 
Toryism than it is now; for of late years the mutual 
approaches of Conservatism and Liberalism have been so 
close, that it is difficult to draw the line of demarcation. 





SIR JAMES GRAHAM. 


367 


The high estimation in which Sir George Sinclair was 
held by Sir Janies appears in almost every letter which 
the latter wrote to the former. No less did he appreciate 
the lofty intellectual attainments of Sir George. And no 
wonder; for viewing his religious character and his dis¬ 
tinguished literary acquirements in conjunction, there can 
be no question that there was no one of his day more 
deserving of universal esteem and admiration than Sir 
George. Out of the numerous letters which Sir George 
received from Sir James, and which have been preserved, 
I am constrained, by the exigencies of space, to content 
myself with a very few. The first letter relates partly to 
the triumphant reception accorded to Sir George by the 
people of Caithness soon after his return to Thurso Castle 
on the close of the Session of 1836, and partly to the 
fears of a revolution in favour of republicanism, with 
which at this time and for several years afterwards he 
seems to have been haunted. The letter is dated— 

Netherby, 5th December, 183G. 

My dear Sir George, 

T read with the greatest pleasure the account of your tri¬ 
umphant reception in Caithness, which may, I think, be received 
as a pledge of your strength and security in that county. I 
read, also, your speeches with satisfaction, and such declarations 
from men of station and approved character like yourself, can¬ 
not fail to produce a salutary effect on the public mind, and will 
tend, I trust, to restore the people of Scotland to their sober 
senses and to a better mind. I am not, however, very san¬ 
guine, for I fear the Republican principle has taken deep root 
among the middle classes, especially in Scotland, where the 
Presbyterian religion is somewhat congenial to their political 
opinions, even among men of piety and virtue ; and since the 
passing of the Reform Act, the deliberate wish and fixed pur¬ 
pose of the middle classes must ultimately prevail. It is our 
duty, however, to resist to the last extremity revolutionary 


3G8 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


changes which we know to be pregnant with danger to the 
peace, the happiness, and the liberties even of those who most 
clamorously desire them, and for one at least, when I supported 
the Reform Bill, I did not intend to undermine the Church, to 
cashier the Lords, or to overthrow the Ministry. 

I shall remain here till the third week of January, and shall 
be happy to see }T>u on your way south if you can conveniently 
pay me a visit. I do not think it will be in my power to attend 
the Glasgow dinner, but I am truly glad that the youths of Scot¬ 
land appreciate the merits of Sir Robert Peel; and any mark 
of respect which can be paid to him is justly due. I am 
always, 

Yours very truly, 

James Graham. 

In the next letter which. I shall give, Sir James Graham 
refers, evidently under feelings of deep disappointment, 
to the defeat which he sustained when contesting his seat 
in Parliament at the General Election of 1837. This was 
the first time he appeared on the hustings after his seces¬ 
sion from the Grey Government, and his joining a new 
and middle party between the Liberals and the extreme 
Tories, which had been formed in 1835, under the leader¬ 
ship of Lord Stanley, afterwards the late Lord Derby. 
Sir James was, in some measure, according to his own 
statement, compensated for his defeat in Cumberland by 
the success of Sir George Sinclair and Sir Francis Bur- 
dett in their election contests. It will be observed how 
extreme his dislike was to Radicals, although only seven 
years before he was, to use his own term, the most 
“furious” of all the advocates of that class of those extreme 
opinions of which the word “ Radical ” was then more 
expressive than it is now. The letter is interesting, be¬ 
cause it presents us with Sir James s own views of an 
election which excited at the time an amount of interest 


LETTER FROM SIR J. GRAHAM TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 360 

in all parts of the country which has rarely been wit¬ 
nessed in any electioneering battle. Sir James had lost 
the support of all his former Liberal friends ; while he 
had not become sufficiently extreme in his Toryism to 
obtain the exertions and the votes of the party to whom 
he had been formerly opposed. At that time telegraphs 
were unknown, and railroads were equally so, between 
London and the North of England, except for a distance 
r about fifty miles between the metropolis and the road 
'irmingham. But so great was the anxiety to know 
result of the contest between Sir James and his 
1 opponents, that the leading morning papers 
■angements, by means of relays of horses, to get 
of the poll by the following day, at an enor- 
se,—in one case, which came specially under 
l ce, of no less than 20 0£. for the two lines. 

TL 'ted— 

Netherby, 16th August, 1837. 

My dear Sir George, 

I congratulate you sincerely on your victory in Caithness, for 
I believe that you were one of the marked victims; and I am 
glad that you disappointed the vindictive spirit of our enemies. 
In my case they have been more fortunate, and their desire of 
vengeance has been partly gratified, but by no means satiated. 

I never was very sanguine as to the result of the struggle 
here; but I was bound to fight the battle, for in honour there 
was no retreat; and the contest will in the end be useful, since 
it has roused a strong Conservative feeling in the parts, which, 
when organized and concentrated, will on some future occasion 
rescue us from the disgrace of being represented by two furious 
Radicals. I have made no arrangement for a seat, but am quite 
content to wait till some suitable vacancv occur; and I can 
assure you I feel neither anxiety nor impatience. 

The kindness of our friends, and of yourself among the 
number, more than compensates to me for the disappointment I 



370 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


have sustained. Burdett’s victory in Wiltshire, following his 
triumph in Westminster, must have amply repaid him for any 
sacrifice which he has made to principle and love of country ; 
and the evening of his political life is gilded to his last by the 
more temperate but not less brilliant light of his setting sun. 
Stanley is now in your neighbourhood ; he left me last week on 
his way to Dunrobin, and from thence to Gordon Castle. I 
wish I could accept your invitation, but I cannot leave home at 
present. 

Very sincerely yours, 

James Graham. 

I pass over various other letters from Sir James 
Graham to Sir George Sinclair, consisting chiefly of the 
expression of friendly feelings towards his correspondent. 
After I have given the following letter, I will myke one 
or two observations on the “ admonition ” whichv .e gives 
to Sir George. The letter is dated— 

10th January, 1838. 

My dear Sir George, 

I am obliged by your letter, and gratified by the praise which 
you bestow on my speech at Carlisle. If it have any claim to 
public attention, the deep conviction with which I entertain the 
sentiments expressed, is a pledge of my sincerity; and it will 
be hard indeed for my enemies to prove that I have been actu¬ 
ated by selfish motives in the painful course which a sense of 
duty has forced upon me. 

My object in writing is to impress on you the danger of nego¬ 
tiations with the Radicals, and I repose no confidence in their 
honesty, believing their principles to be unsound, and their in¬ 
tentions to be wicked and dangerous. And a new government, 
formed on the ruins of the present, by their co-operation and as¬ 
sistance, will be built on sand, and will merit a curse and not a 
blessing. I pray you be cautious in this matter. Wait a little, and 
the present Ministers will fall into universal odium and contempt; 
but beware of everything which may be interpreted into in¬ 
trigue with the common enemy, which I consider the republican 
party; and the notoriety of any such proceeding would be sure 



SIR JAMES GRAHAM’S FEARS OF REPUBLICANISM. 371 

to strengthen the hands for such to deprive of power. The right, 
I am persuaded, will at last prevail, but the battle must be 
fought—must be fought in the aid, at least without concert with 
the evil D. 

Excuse from a friend this frank admonition, 

And believe me alwavs 

«y 

Yours very truly, 

James Graham. 

The “ admonition ” which Sir James Graham here 
gives to Sir George Sinclair, to have nothing to do with 
a certain political party in Parliament, is reiterated again 
and again in other letters. He calls those which were, at 
the date of his letter, generally spoken of as the Indepen¬ 
dent Liberal Party, in contradistinction to the Whigs, or 
those who servilely supported the Government of Lord 
Melbourne,—the Republican Party; but that phrase, 
which was meant to be one of opprobrium, was not 
just. The party thus called Republican consisted of 
from thirty to forty in number, and though they went 
far beyond the different Whig administrations that have 
existed since the passing of the Reform Bill of 1832, in 
the liberal character of their political sentiments, I do 
not believe that there was a single one among them who 
was in favour of Republicanism,—so far, I mean, as re¬ 
garded the wish to see a Republican form of go vernment 
in this country. Some of them might possibly have 
thought a Republican form of government might be best 
for France and some other Continental countries, just 
as many do now ; but it is my firm conviction that, 
had it been proposed to abolish the Monarchy in Great 
Britain, in order that a Republic should be erected on 
its ruins, neither Sir William Moles worth, Mr. Joseph 
Hume, Mr. Thomas Duncombe, Mr. Thomas Wakley, Mr. 

B B 2 




372 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

William Williams, nor any other member of what Sir 
James Graham calls, in the above letter, “ The Republican 
Party/' would have been found to hold up his hand for 
the abolition of our English Monarchy. 

The next letter from Sir James to Sir George will be 
the last which I will give. It was written in the same 
year as the one which I have just given, but at a later 
period of that year, being dated— 

October 18th, 1838. 

My dear Sir George, 

Though I have nothing to communicate, yet I am unwilling 
to allow your kind letter of September to remain unnoticed. I 
have been far from well for the last month, suffering from 
repeated attacks of gout, which have confined me to my room, 
and which I cannot shake off as heretofore. I am thus reminded 
of the melancholy truth— 

“-veniunt morti tristisque senectus, 

Et labore, et dura; rapit inclementia mortis,” 

—a truth which, to men without hope beyond the grave, is 
melancholy indeed; but which I endeavour to improve as a 
warning kindly sent to prepare for immortality. 

Lord Derby will survive his late attack, hut the shock has 
been severe in the extreme, and the next will probably be fatal. 
I hope we shall have Stanley in the Commons for another 
Session ; hut his presence in the Lords would not be without 
certain advantages. I am sorry that you are so much dissatisfied 
with the last Session. I think the surrender of the Appro¬ 
priation Clause a splendid triumph of principle over “ shabbi¬ 
ness,” and the settlement of the Irish Tithe question on safe 
and solid grounds is an immense advantage. I believe also we 
are gaining ground in the country, and that the recent regis¬ 
tration is favourable ; and although the dangers are many and 
great, yet I do not despair; and I am convinced that Peel has 
played the game in the wisest and best manner—whether we 
consider the interests of party or the welfare of the country. 
You must remember that the union of the Court and of the 




SIR JAMES GRAHAM. 


373 


Democracy is a combination for which no provision is made, 
since no one could anticipate it; and the struggle against such 
fearful odds requires peculiar caution—since, if it be permanent, 
nothing can resist it; and it is so unnatural that one would hope 
it might be dissolved in the only way which is safe, and not a 
source of danger to the Sovereign and the Constitution. 

Always truly yours, 

James Graham. 

The Lord Derby here referred to as having shortly 
before been dangerously' ill, and whom Sir James predicts 
will not long survive, is not the Lord Derby who died in 
October last, but his father. The prediction of Sir James 
was not, however, fulfilled. The Lord Derby of whom 
he speaks did not die until the year 1851,—thirteen 
years after Sir James had so confidently anticipated his 
early death. 

Sir James Graham, it will be observed, speaks, in the 
early part of the above letter, in a tone emphatically 
moral in regard to the present and the future. He often 
did so in the House of Commons, especially when seeking 
to make a deep impression on the House in relation to 
his patriotism. Though he received less credit for 
patriotism than most Members, there was no one in the 
Commons who made so frequent and energetic a protes¬ 
tation of being a patriot of the first magnitude. 1 
remember that, on one occasion, he was strenuously 
opposing some measure of the Melbourne Ministry, from 
which, if it should pass, he confidently predicted the 
inevitable ruin of the constitution and the country. 
And he concluded, in a very solemn tone of voice, by 
quoting from Pope’s translation of Homer’s “ Iliad,” the 
impassioned words of Hector, spoken in the belief of 
Troy’s impending destruction :— 



374 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


“ The day when thou, Imperial Troy ! must bend 
And see thy warriors fall, thy glories end.— 

May I lie cold before that dreadful day, 

Pressed with a load of monumental clay ! ” 

As nobody believed that Sir James Graliam would 

rather die than see the Ministerial measure in question 

carried, the latter two lines elicited loud laughter. But 

Mr. Ferrand, one of the boldest and most outspoken men 

that ever sat in Parliament, got up and declared, in 

language not to be mistaken, his utter disbelief in Sir 

James’s assertion that he would prefer death to the pass- 

• 

ing of the measure. He added that he would express 
that disbelief in the words of the poet just quoted. 
He remarked that probably the House would remember 
a couplet written by the same author, or rather the 
same translator, of the Iliad, as the one whose words 
they had just heard quoted. The couplet from Pope was 
this— 

“ Where London’s column, pointing to the skies, 

Like some tall bully, lifts the head, and lies.” 

The laughter was loud, and the applause vehement. 
The column referred to is the Monument at London 
Bridge, and what gave the quotation its great point was 
the curious coincidence that Sir James Graham was the 
tallest man in the House of Commons, and that he was 
regarded as an intellectual “ bully ” in his encounters 
with his opponents in the parliamentary arena. 

The last of the Members of Parliament, friends and 
correspondents of Sir George Sinclair, from whose letters 
it is my purpose to make a selection, is one of the most 
distinguished men who, since the passing of the Reform 
Bill of 1832, have had a seat in the representative branch 
of the Legislature. When I mention the name of Mr* 


LETTER FROM MR. DISRAELI. 


375 


Disraeli, I have clone enough, previous to giving three of 
his letters. His name needs no introductory observa¬ 
tions. 

He and Sir George were great friends. Their friend- 
ship, if not formed because of the similarity of some of 
their classical pursuits, was cemented by that circum¬ 
stance. This is evident from many incidental observa¬ 
tions which are frequently to be met with in the letters 
of Mr. Disraeli to Sir George. In most cases these letters 
are very brief, and mostly expressive of the very high 
regard which he felt for the subject of these Memoirs. 
I should like to have given more of Mr. Disraeli’s letters 
than I purpose to do, because of the beauty of their lan¬ 
guage ; but though not marked “ private,” there are 
some things in them which, when written, were manifestly 
meant to be considered confidental. In the letters which 
I subjoin there is, I feel assured, not one single word 
which Mr. Disraeli would not have uttered in the House 
of Commons, had the turn which any debate had taken 
rendered desirable the language he here employs. The 
first of the letters of Mr. Disraeli refers to the condition 
into which the Conservative party were brought by the 
desertion of their leader when he became a proselyte to 
the views of Mr. Cobclen on the subject of the Corn Laws. 
Its date is— 

Grosvenor Gate, March 13th, 1840. 

My dear Sir George, 

I have delayed answering your very welcome letter, in the 
hope that I might find a quiet half hour to communicate with 
one for whom I have so much regard and respect as yourself; 
but that seems impossible, and I cannot allow another day to 
pass without expressing how much touched I was by hearing 
from you, and how much I sympathize with those sorrows which 
have prevented us all of late enjoying your society. 


376 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Here we are involved in a struggle of ceaseless excitement 
and energy. Deserted by our leaders, even by the subalterns 
of the camp, we have been obliged to organise ourselves and 
choose chieftains from the rank and file: but the inspiration of 
a good cause and a great occasion have in some degree com¬ 
pensated for our deficiencies, and we work with enthusiasm. 
Would you were among us to aid and counsel! and that great 
spirit too, departed from this world as well as the senate, on 
whose memory I often dwell with resjDect and fondness. 

I thank you for your hints, of which I shall avail myself, and 
shall always be proud and happy to cherish your friendship. 

Yours, dear Sir George, 

Very sincerely, 

B. Disraeli. 

Another letter from Mr. Disraeli to Sir George will be 
admired wherever read for the charms of its diction, 
especially in the first paragraph. Its date is—■ 

Grosvenor Gate, Nov. 25, 1847. 

My dear Sir George, 

I do not pretend to be a correspondent, as I have often told 
you. I am overworked, otherwise I should be very glad to commu¬ 
nicate with you, of all men, in the spirit, and bathe the memory 
sometimes in those delicious passages of ancient song, which 
your unrivalled scholarship so beautifully commands. My dear 
friend John Manners writes to me every week, now he is shut 
out from Parliament, and expects no return, but he gives me his 
impressions and counsels, often the clearer from his absence 
from our turbulent and excited scene. I cannot venture to ask 
such favours from you, though I should know how to appreciate 
the suggestive wisdom of a classic sage. 

On Tuesday will commence one of the most important 
debates that ever took place in the House of Commons. I shall 
reserve myself, I apprehend, to the end. It will last several 
nights. There is a passage about usury, which haunts my 
memory, and which I fancied was in Juvenal, but I could not 
light upon it as I threw my eye over the pages yesterday. Not¬ 
withstanding our utilitarian senate, I wish, if possible, that 



LETTER FROM MR. DISRAELI. 


377 


the noble Roman spirit should sometimes be felt in the House 
of Commons, expressed in its own magnificent tongue. I have 
of late years ventured sometimes on this, not without success, 
and in one instance I remember a passage which I owed to 
your correspondence. It was apposite, when in reference to 
Sir James Graham’s avowed oblivion of the past, I told him— 

“ At Di meminenmt, mcminit Jides” 

Let me at least hear that you are better, and always believe 
me, with the most unaffected regard, 

Your friend and servant, 

B. Disraeli. 


The next and last letter of Mr. Disraeli's which I will 
lay before the reader was written immediately after the 
expulsion of Louis Philippe from the throne of France, as 
the consequence of the Revolution of 1848. Though no 
date is given to the letter, the phrase, “ The intelligence 
of yesterday afternoon/’ the other phrases, “ We are in 
the midst of a revolution/' “ The catastrophe of Paris," 
&c., clearly fix the time after which the letter was written. 
It is as follows :— 


My dear Sir George, 

Thanks, many, for your excellent hints of this morning. 
Every day for these two months, I have been wishing to find a 
moment of repose to write to you—but I have been entirely 
engrossed with affairs, public and private—and now, after all, I 
write to you in the midst of a revolution. The catastrophe of 
Paris is so vast, so sudden, so inexplicable, so astounding, that I 
have not yet recovered from the intelligence of yesterday after¬ 
noon. It must have an effect on this country, and on all 
Europe prepared to explode. Here the tone of men is changed 
in an instant, and our friend, Joseph Hume, made a speech last 
night under the inspiration of the Jacobinical triumph—quite 
himself again ! 

As for votes of non-confidence, had one been proposed when 
you suggested it, I calculated that the Government might have 


378 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


had 200 majority: all the Peelites and timeservers being then 
prepared to support them. Affairs are now somewhat changed, 
and it is on the cards, that a few days may produce some result. 
I am heartily glad I denounced the Jacobin movement of Man¬ 
chester before this last French revolution.* I am obliged and 
gratified by all your letters, and enclose some documents as you 
wished. 

Yours ever, 

D. 

It will be observed that Mr. Disraeli varies his signa¬ 
ture to his letters. He seldom gives his name, “ Ben¬ 
jamin Disraeli/’ in full; not often even “ B. Disraeli.” 
His favourite signatures, in the letters lying before me, 
are either “ D. ’ or “ Disraeli.” I may mention that he 
writes an exceedingly fine hand, which would be highly 
prized in mercantile circles. 

* It is right I should state that this refers to a speech made by Mr. Bright, 
under the excitement of the Continental movement, at Manchester, a month 
before the French Revolution, in which he said, “Manchester ought to unfurl 
the banner of Liberty, Fraternity, and Equality.” 


CHAPTER XVI. 


Letters from M. Berryer—M. Victor Schoelcher—Mr. Carlyle—Mrs. Carlyle— 
and other Friends with whom Sir George Sinclair corresponded. 

No one who knew Sir George Sinclair could be 
ignorant of the fact that, besides his extensive corre¬ 
spondence with Peers of the Realm and Members of the 
House of Commons, he corresponded largely with persons 
who had acquired literary distinction in the world. 
Among these were many foreigners—especially French¬ 
men. The two most eminent of these were M. Berryer 
and M. Victor Schcelcher. As their letters to Sir George 
are the most interesting, I must limit my specimens of 
the writings of his foreign friends and correspondents to 
the two whose names I have mentioned. And first I 
begin with letters from M. Berryer. Everyone who has 
the slightest acquaintance either with the forensic elo¬ 
quence, or politics, or literature of modern France, must 
be so familiar with the name of M. Berryer in relation to 
these three points, that it is to his eye and ear a house¬ 
hold word. At the bar M. Berryer has had no rival for 
eloquence, or for the brilliancy generally of his profes¬ 
sional career, during the half century in which he 
practised at the French bar. Equally distinguished was 
M; Berryer in the various parliaments of which he was a 
member. His speeches at the bar* and in the legislature } 


380 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

were sufficient of themselves, to show how great and 
varied his intellectual acquirements were ; but his private 
correspondence and published writings equally attest the 
same fact. He was, indeed, regarded by France, taking 
him all in all, as in various respects the greatest French¬ 
man of his day ; and this though politically opposed to 
the great majority of the French people. He was a 
Legitimist, and most faithfully and firmly did he 
identify himself with the elder branch of the Bourbons 
in his fallen fortunes. The Count de Chambord, whom 
M. Berryer always regarded as the lawful sovereign of 
France, and invariably addressed as such in all his cor- * 
respondence with him, never had, and never will or can 
have, a more devoted friend than he found in M. Berryer. 
It will, I doubt not, be remembered by many, that when 
M. Berryer knew that he had only a few hours to live, 
his last act was to address a letter to the Count de 
Chambord, as Henry the Fifth, expressive of his un¬ 
altered devotion to himself personally, and of fidelity to 
his cause,—which was perhaps never surpassed for the 
fervour of its affection or the beauty of its diction. 
With this distinguished man Sir George carried on, for 
seventeen or eighteen years, an intimate correspondence, 
chiefly in relation to political affairs in France, but also, 
to a considerable extent, on matters connected with 
literature. Sir George Sinclair seems, so far as I can 
see from the papers he has left, to have commenced the 
correspondence. The following letter, from Sir George to 
M. Berryer, relates, it will be seen, partly to political and 
partly to literary subjects. I give it in full, in French, 
because I am assured by the gentleman to whom I am 
indebted for the translation that the French is so exqui- 



LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO M. BERRYER. 381 


sitely beautiful as to merit being given as an example of 
Sir George Sinclair’s power of expression in that lan¬ 
guage. It is right, therefore, that those who possess a 
thorough knowledge of the French language, and are 
conversant with French literature, should be presented 
with the letter in the language in which it was originally 
written. 

Thurso Castle, Ecosse, 

Ce 18 Janvier, 1849. 

Monsieur, 

Le plaisir que j’eprouvai en lisant votre aimable lettre fat 
aussi grand que l’honneur que vous m’avez fait en voulant bien 
me l’ecrire. Je passe ma vie dans cette retraite septentrionale, 
ou je ne vois personne qui partage les sentimens dont mon ame 
est profondement penetree, ou qui s’interesse aux souvenirs, 
tendres et douleureux, qu’une memoire trop fidele renouvelle 
chaque jour, lorsque je songe aux membres deflints ou vivans de 
la plus auguste et plus ancienne des families europeennes, et 
aux dignes et devoues serviteurs dont le loyal et inebranlable 
attachement a adouci l’amertume de leur exil. J’ai envoye 
des exemplaires de ma brochure a quelques uns des plus distin- 
guds de mes compatriotes, ainsi qu’a plusieurs de mes amis 
intimes ; mais je n’ai rencontrd, presque nulle part, la moindre 
lueur de cette sympathie dont mon coeur sent le besoin, et sur 
lequel j’avais meme ose compter. Mais helas ! dans ce pays-ci, 
comme partout ailleurs, il parait que fegoisme a rdtreci presque 
tous les esprits, a glace presque tous les coeurs. Pour acquerir 
ou conserver de I influence, il faut ramper a la Cour dans la 
fange de l’adulation la plus avilissante, et finir par braver avec 
insolence un peuple qu’on a commencd par cajoler avec bassesse. 
En vain, done, ai-je cheri la douce esperance, qu’on se serait 
enfin empressd de rendre une justice tardive a ce doux et noble 
monarque dont la sagesse a ete demontree, et les motifs justifies, 
non seulement par les evenemens affreux de l’annee passde, mais 
par les ddsordres, les conjurations, les perfidies, les inconse¬ 
quences, de toutes celles qui sont ecoulees depuis 1830. Accable 
done comme je fus par le silence ou la froideur qui ont presque 
partout suivi la distribution de mon ouvrage, ce fut pour moi 


382 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


une veritable consolation d’apprendre que le plus illustre, le 
plus zele, et le plus courageux partisan de la meilleure et la 
plus sainte des causes, a daigne approuver mon travail, et 
apprdcier mon devouement. 

C’est a vous, sans doute, Monsieur, qu’il appartient de deter¬ 
miner quel serait le moment le plus opportun pour faire retentir 
en France une declaration en faveur du grand et sacre principe 
de la ldgitimite—principe qui doit servir de base pour la conso¬ 
lidation de l’ordre et de la veritable liberte. Quant a moi, je 
suis portd a croire qu’une majorite immense de votre population 
est royaliste de coeur et d’ame, et n’attend qu’une expression 
ardente et courageuse de loyaute, de la part de quelque patriote 
zele et connu, pour faire eclater dans tous les departemens son 
mepris pour la republique, et son attachement a la monarcbie. 

II est vrai que je me laisse peut-etre entrainer trop loin par l’amour ' 
et le respect que j’ai depuis si longtems voues au digne et cher 
rejeton de tant de rois :— 

“ Pour tous mes ennemis, je declare les siens, 

Et je le reconnais comme Roi des Troyens.’’ 

Je crois qu’il a cultivd dans l’ecole rude mais salutaire de 
l’adversite les vertus qui assureront son propre bonheur, et celui 
de la grande nation que Dieu l’appellera a gouverner. “ Comme 
Charles X.,” il sera doux, compatissant, affable, genereux, paci- 
fique. On dira un jour de lui, selon l’expression dun de vos 
poetes;— 

“ II veut rendre le monde heureux. 

II prefere au bonheur d’en devenir le maitre, ’ 

La gloire de montrer qu’il est digne de l’etre.” 

Quelque vif cependant que soit le desir que j’eprouve de 
voir la restoration de Henri Y. au trone de ses ancetres, je 
souhaite avec une egale ardeur, comme j’ai deja eu l’honneur 
de vous dire, qu’on rende enfin justice a la memoire, et aux 
vertus, de son auguste et excellent aieul. Ah ! qu’on a ete dur 
et ingrat a son dgard ! On accueillit en France avec transport 
le cercueil d’un homme, doue' sans doute de grandes qualitds, 
mais qui sacnfia des millions d etres humains, parmi presque 
toutes les nations, a son ambition insatiable et effre'nee, et qui 
remplit les trois quarts de l’Europe de carnage et de desolation ; 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO M. BERRYER. 883 


et on n’a pas encore reclame, dii sein d’un pays etranger, les 
cendres du plus doux et du meilleur des monarques, qui deposa 
sa couronne, et renon^a aux droits sacres de sa famille, pour 
ne point faire verser le sang des traitres les plus vils, et des 
ennemis les plus acharnes ! Mais qnelque frappante et penible 
que soit cette inconsequence, il y a une autre qui m’etonne 
encore bien davantage. Dans un coin retire de l’Allemagne, 
entouree seulement de quelques serviteurs devoues, qu’elle edifie 
chaque jour par sa piete et par sa resignation, demeure la fille 
de Louis XVI., la bru de Charles X., la veuve de Louis XIX. 
Et les Fran^ais peuvent laisser cette illustre victime de tant de 
crimes dans cet dtat d’isolement et d’abandon ! Ah ! mon cher 
et digne ami, c’est ici surtout que la voix de mon cceur trouvera 
un echo fidele dans la sensibilite du votre. Voila, voila le sanctu- 
aire que les pdlerins fran^ais devraient s’empresser de frequenter. 
C’est la qu’on ne saurait trop tot verser des larmes d’attendrisse- 
ment et de penitence, pour effacer les traces du sang des martyrs, 
dont elle partagea les infortunes, et dont elle imite les vertus ! 
Ah ! ne devrait-on pas reconnaitre la nullite d’une abdication 
forcde et conditionnelle, quand ce ne serait que pour inscrire 
dans le catalogue de vos princes le nom de Marie Therese—ce 
nom qui merite a tant de titres le devouement le plus vif, et la 
veneration la plus profonde? Le rappel de cet auguste per- 
sonnage a une patrie qu’elle n’a jamais cessd de cherir, malgrd 
tous les torts inouis qu’elle pourrait lui rdprocher, est, si j’ose 
m’exprimer ainsi, une expiation que la France devrait s’em¬ 
presser de lui offrir. Je ne saurais vous exprimer combien je 
suis dtonne que parmi tous les orateurs qui se sont fait entendre 
depuis les jours de Fevrier, aucun n’a osd rendre justice a la 
mdmoire d’un des meilleurs de ses rois, ni aux grandes et saintes 
qualitds de son illustre belle-fille; et que ce soit un etranger 
obscur et isole qui a ete le premier, et jusqu’ici, je crois, le seul 
a dlever sa faible voix en leur faveur ! Helas ! ils ont dtd pen¬ 
dant dix-huit ans les objets journaliers de mes pensdes et de 
ma sympathie. Depuis l’affreux moment de leur exil, combien de 
fois ai-je rdpandu des pleUrs lorsque je songeai aux malheurs 
qu’ils ont si longtems soufferts, et si peu merites. Les gens du 
monde se moqueraient de moi, et regarderaient mes reflections 
comme des reves fanatiques, ou “ des dgaremens du coeur et de 


3S4 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


l’esprit,” si j’osais leur parler ties chateaux en Espagne dont 
mon imagination a souvent dte occupee. Mais 

“ Chacun songe en veillant—il n’est rien de plus doux ; 

Une flatteuse erreur em porte alors les larmes,” kc. 

Et depuis les affreux jours de Juillet, qu’on a, je crois, cessd de 
celdbrer, et commence a regretter, j’ai mille fois songe combien 
j’aurais etd heureux si cette maison avait ete assez grande et 
assez magnifique pour servir d’asile a ties exils si dignes de 
tendresse et de respect. Je me les suis souvent representes comme 
assembles dans ce chateau, et mon cceur a trouve un doux 
soulagement lorsque j’ai pense a tous les soins que je leur aurais 
prodiguds, a toute la sympathie que je leur aurais temoignee, a 
tous les moyens auxquels j’aurais eu recours pour leur procurer 
ties distractions et ties plaisirs. Yous pouvez done vous imaginer, 
mon cher et digne M. Berryer, avec quelle impatience j’attends 
rheureux moment qui amenera la restauration d’une famille 
doude tie tant de qualites qui devraient “faire voler partout ties 
coeurs a leur passage.” 

Et je crois que ce moment important ne saurait etre fort 
eloignd C’est vous, j’espere, que le ciel a destine d’en accelerer 
1’arrivde. Le Prince Louis Napoleon sera bientot convaincu que 
sa position exaltee ne saurait se maintenir longtems. II sera, 
avant qu’il soit peu, le jouet d’un peuple capricieux, dont il est, 
ou plutot dont il a etd, l’idole. Ne sauriez-vous lui persuader 
qu’il vaudrait mieux pour lui d’etre le President du Conseil, ou 
l’Ambassadeur a la Cour Britannique de son roi ldgitime, que 
d’etre President d’une republique qui ne peut etre ni stable ni 
heureuse \ Ah ! je suis persuade que, monte sur le faite, il aspire 
a descendre, ou que, du rnoins, cela ne manquera pas d’arriver 
bientot. Yous lui direz, en parlant de votre auguste maitre_ 

“ Employez-vous pour lui ; 

Faites-vous un effort pour lui servir d’appui. 

Je sais que c’est beaucoup que ce que je demande, 

Mais plus 1 effort est g'rand, plus la gloire en est grande. 

Conserver un rival dont vous etes jaloux, 

C’est un travail de vertu qui n’a^partient qu’h vous,” kc. 

Je ne crois pas, non plus, qu’il sera tres difficile de persuader 
M. le Mardchal Bugeaud qu’il assurera sa propre gloire autant 
que celle de sa patrie en acceptant le commandement supreme 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO M. BERRYER. 385 

de Farmee de son roi legitime: et MM. les Generaux Cavaignac 
et Changarnier recevraient avec plaisir et reconnaissance, en 
recompense du zele avec lequel ils ont maintenu la cause de 
l’ordre et de la tranquillite publique, le rang de Mardchal de 
France, quand il provient de celui dont Fai'eul mit le baton entre 
les mains des Turenne et des Catinat. II parait meme plus que 
probable que MM. Guizot et Thiers s’uniraient avec vous dans 
cette bonne et sainte entreprise, et se laisseraient persuader d^ac¬ 
cepter les fonctions du ministere sous les auspices de Henri V., 
si on garantissait a la Maison d’Orleans l’oubli du passd, la 
jouissance du present, et les esperances de l’avenir. 

Ah ! mon clier et respectable ami, si j’avais le bonheur, tel que 
je suis, triste et accable d’infirmitds, d’etre membre de F Assem¬ 
ble Nationale, j’y ferais entendre, sous le moindre ddlai, “les 
restes d’une voix qui tombe, et d’une ardeur qui s’eteint.” Mais 
si j’dtais doue des talens les plus rares, de l’eloquence la plus 
entrainante, du patriotisme le plus pur, de la probite la plus a 
Fabri de soup 9 on; si je possedais une influence fondde sur le 
respect le plus universel de mes compatriotes, et qui me mettait 
a portee, surtout dans la plus juste des causes, de donner l’essor 
aux sentimens de loyautd dont je crois que presque tous les 
coeurs Frai^ais sont ddja penetres,—en un mot, si j’dtais M. 
Berryer,—je monterais la tribune, je prononcerais le nom, je 
ferais valoir les droits de l’enfant de miracle, je dirais a ma 
conscience, 

“ Je connais mon devoir, c’est a moi de le suivre, 

Je n’examine point si j’y pourrais survivre.” 

Mais il est bien terns de m’arreter. J’ai peut-etre trop abuse de 
la libertd que votre aimable et excellente lettre m’a en quelque 
fa^on enhardi de prendre :— 

“ Pour vous encourager ma voix manque de termes : 

Mon coeur ne forme point des pen sees assez fermes. 

Moi-meme en cet adieu j’ai les larmes aux yeux, 

Faites votre devoir, et laissez faire aux Dieux.” 

J’ai l’honneur d’etre, avec les plus profonds sentimens de 
respect et de reconnaissance, 

Mon tres clier M. Berryer, 

Votre tres humble, et tres attache serviteur, 

George Sinclair, 


c c 


38G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


The following is the translation of the above, with 
which I have been favoured by a friend, who is eminent 
for his knowledge of the French language :— 

Thurso Castle, Scotland, 

18th January, 1849. 

Sir, 

The pleasure I experienced in reading your friendly letter 
was as great as the honour you did me in writing it. I pass 
my life in this northern retreat, where I meet with no one who 
shares with me the sentiments with which my soul is deeply 
penetrated, or who takes an interest in the tender and painful 
souvenirs which a too faithful memory renews every day, when 
I think on the dead or the living members of the most august 
and most ancient of European families, and on the worthy and' 
devoted servants whose loyal and unswerving attachment has 
softened the bitterness of their exile. I have sent copies of my 
pamphlet to a few of the most distinguished of my countrymen, 
and to several of my personal friends; but I have hardly any¬ 
where met with the faintest glimmer of that sympathy of which 
my heart knows the want, and upon which I had even ventured 
to count. But, alas! in this country, as everywhere else, 
selfishness has narrowed almost every mind, and frozen almost 
every heart. To acquire or preserve influence, it is necessary to 
grovel at Courts in the mire of the most degrading adulation, 
and end by braving with insolence a people that you began by 
cajoling with baseness. In vain, then, have I cherished the 
sweet hope, that at length the people would be eager to render 
tardy justice to that mild and noble monarch whose wisdom has 
been demonstrated, and whose intentions have been justified, 
not only by the fearful events of last year, but by disorders, 
conspiracies, perfidies, and inconsistencies of all those which 
have elapsed since 1830. Crushed as I was, then, by the 
silence or the coldness which almost everywhere followed the 
distribution of my pamphlet, it was a real consolation to me to 
learn that the most illustrious, the most zealous, and the most 
courageous partizan of the best and most holy of causes, has 
deigned to approve my labour, and to appreciate my devotion. 

It is to you, sir, that it doubtless belongs to determine what 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO M. BERRYER. 387 

would be the most fitting time to cause to resound throughout 
France a declaration in favour of the great and sacred principle 
of legitimacy—a principle that should serve as a base for the 
consolidation of order and of real liberty. As for myself, I am 
led to believe that an enormous majority of your population is 
Royalist, heart and soul, and only awaits an ardent and cour¬ 
ageous expression of loyalty on the part of some zealous and 
well known patriot, to cause to burst forth, in all the Depart¬ 
ments, its contempt for the Republic and its attachment to the 
Monarchy. It is true, perhaps, that I allow myself to be carried 
away too far by the love and the respect which I have so long 
bestowed on the worthy and beloved scion of so many kings. 

“ I declare all his enemies as mine, 

And recognise him as King of the Trojans.” 

I believe he has cultivated, in the rude but wholesome school 
of adversity, the virtues that will insure his own fortune, and 
that of the nation which God will summon him to govern. 
“ Comme Charles X.,” he will be mild, feeling, generous, pacific ; 
and it will be said of him one day, in the words of one of your 
poets— 

“ He desires to make the world happy. 

He prefers to the happiness of becoming its master, 

The glory of showing himself worthy of being so.” 

Strong, however, as is the desire I feel of witnessing the 
restoration of Henry V. to the throne of his ancestors, I desire 
wdth equal ardour, as I have already had the honour of telling 
you, that at length justice should be done to the memory and 
to the virtues of his august and excellent grandfather. Oh ! 
how hardly and how ungratefully has he been treated! They 
welcomed with transports in France the coffin of a man, 
endowed, certainly, with great qualities, but who sacrificed 
millions of human beings, in almost every country, to his in¬ 
satiable and unbridled ambition, and who filled three-fourths 
of Euroj)e with carnage and desolation; while there has not 
yet been any effort to bring over, from the heart of a foreign 
country, the ashes of the gentlest and best of monarchs, who 
laid aside his crown, and renounced the sacred rights of his 

family, in order to save the blood of the vilest traitors and the 

c c 2 


388 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


most inveterate enemies from being shed. But however striking 
and painful be this inconsistency, there is another that astonishes 
me still more. In a retired corner of Germany, surrounded only 
by a few devoted servants whom she daily edifies by her piety 
and resignation, dwells the daughter of Louis XVI., the daughter- 
in-law of Charles X., the widow of Louis XIX. : and the French 
can allow that illustrious victim of so many crimes to re¬ 
main in such a state of isolation and neglect! My dear and 
esteemed friend, it is here, above all, that the voice of my heart 
will find a faithful echo in the sensibility of your own. There, 
there, is the sanctuary to which Frenchmen should hasten. It 
is there that it would be impossible to drop too early tears of 
compassion and of penitence, to wipe out the traces of the blood 
of the martyrs whose misfortunes she shared, and whose virtues 
she yet imitates. Oh ! should not the nullity of a forced and 
conditional abdication be recognised, were it only to inscribe in 
the catalogue of your queens the name of Maria Theresa—a 
name which, on so many grounds, merits the most lively devo¬ 
tion, and the most profound veneration? The recall of that 
august personage to a country which she has never ceased to 
love, in spite of the unheard-of wrongs with which she might 
reproach it, is, if I may venture so to express myself, an 
expiation which France should hasten to offer her. I could 
not express to you how surprised I am that, among all the 
orators who have gained the public ear since the days of 
February, not one has dared to do justice to one of the best 
of kings, nor to the great and holy qualities of his illustrious 
daughter-in-law; and that it should be left to an obscure and. 
isolated foreigner—and thus far, I believe, the only one—to 
raise his feeble voice in their favour. Alas ! they have been for 
eighteen years the daily objects of my thoughts and sympathies. 
From the fearful moment of their exile, how many times have 
I shed tears in thinking of the misfortunes which they have so 
long endured, and so little merited! Worldly men would laugh 
at me, and treat my reflections as fanatical ravings, or “ wander¬ 
ings of the heart and of the mind,” if I were to talk to them of 
the Chateaux en Espagne with which my imagination has often 
been filled. But— 

“ Every one meditates as he watches—there is nothing- more pleasing.” 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR TO M. BERRYER. 389 


A flattering error will then carry away the mind : and since 
the dreadful days of July, which people have now, I believe, 
ceased to celebrate, and are beginning to regret, 1 have a 
thousand times thought how happy I should be if this house 
were large enough, and magnificent enough, to serve as an 
asylum for exiles so deserving of affection and respect. I have 
often imagined them assembled in this chateau , and my heart 
has experienced a delightful relief in thinking on all the care I 
would have lavished upon them; on all the sympathy I should 
have manifested for them; on all the expedients I should have 
contrived to procure them diversion and pleasure. You may 
imagine, then, my dear and esteemed M. Berryer, with what 
impatience I await the happy moment that will bring about the 
restoration of a family gifted with so many qualities that should 
“ faire voler partout des coeurs a leur passage ”—(“ everywhere 
make hearts fly to greet them on their way ”). 

And I believe that that important moment cannot be very 
distant. It is you, I hope, that Heaven has destined to ac¬ 
celerate its arrival. Prince Louis Napoleon will soon be 
convinced that his lofty position cannot long be maintained. 
In some short time he will be the sport of a capricious people 
of whom he is, or rather has been, the idol. Could you not 
persuade him that it would be better for him to be the Presi¬ 
dent of the Council, or the Ambassador of his legitimate King 
to the British Court, than president of a Republic which can be 
neither stable nor jnusperous ? Ah ! I am convinced that— 

“ Mounted on the height, he aspires to descend.” 

Or you could at least tell him that that would not fail to 
happen speedily. You could say to him, in speaking of your 
august master :— 

“ Occupy yourself in his interests; 

Make an effort to be a stay to him. 

I know it is a great deal I ask of you, 

But the greater the effort, the greater will be your glory. 

To support a rival of whom you are jealous, 

Is a trait of virtue that belongs only to you.” 

I do not think, either, that it would be a very difficult thing 
to persuade Marshal Bugeaud that he would serve his own 
fame, as well as that of his country, by accepting the supreme 


390 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


command of the army of his legitimate King; and Generals 
Cavaignac and Changarnier would receive with pleasure and 
gratitude, by way of recompense for the zeal with which they 
have maintained the cause of order and of public tranquillity, 
the rank of Marshal of France, when it emanates from him 
whose grandsire placed the baton in the hands of the Turennes 
and the Catinats. It even seems more than likely that MM. 
Guizot and Thiers would favour you in this good and holy 
enterprise, and would allow themselves to be prevailed upon to 
accept ministerial functions under the auspices of Henry V., if 
the House of Orleans were guaranteed oblivion of the past, the 
enjoyment of the present, and hope of the future. 

Ah, my dear and esteemed friend, if I had the good fortune 
of being a member of the National Assembly, sad as I am, and 
borne down with infirmities, I would with the least dela}^ 
“ make the remains of a failing voice to be heard, and of an 
ardour that is becoming quenched,”—(J’y ferais entendre “ les 
restes d’une voix qui tombe, et d’une ardeur qui s’dteint.”). But 
were I endowed with talents the most rare, with eloquence the 
most captivating, with patriotism the most pure, with probity 
the most removed from suspicion; if I possessed an influence 
founded on the most universal respect of my countrymen, and 
which placed it within my power, especially in the most just 
of causes, to give an impulse to the sentiments of loyalty by 
which I believe all French hearts are already penetrated—in a 
word, if I were M. Berryer—I would ascend the tribune; I 
would pronounce the name; I would cause to prevail the rights 
of the child of miracle ; I would say to my conscience :— 

“ I know my duty, it is for me to follow it. 

I do not pause to examine whether I should he likely to survive 
the effort.” 

But it is high time that I should close. I have, perhaps, too 
far abused the liberty which your amiable and excellent letter 
has in some way emboldened me to take. 

“ To encourage you, my voice is wanting in words. 

My heart does not prompt thoughts sufficiently firm. 

I myself, in this adieu, have tears in my eyes. 

Do your duty, and let the Gods take their course.” 


LETTER FROM M. BERRYER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 391 

I have the honour to be, with the most profound sentiments 
ol respect and gratitude, 

My very dear M. Berryer, 

Your very humble and very attached Servant, 

George Sinclair. 

The following letter from M. Berryer to Sir George is 
an acknowledgment of a pamphlet from the former. 


Sir, 


Paris, 6th January, 1849. 


I have read with the most lively interest the pamphlet which 
you have done me the honour of sending me. 

The loftiness of your views* the nobleness and the elevation 
of your ideas, enable me to comprehend perfectly the esteem 
and the sympathy which have been evinced for you by the illus¬ 
trious personages whose letters you communicate ; for, in my 
own case, I experience the same sentiments in reference to you, 
and I particularly thank you for the exceptions you have been 
so good as to make in my favour. 

I should only fear that in the period of agitation and uncer¬ 
tainty which still continues, your work might not be sufficiently 
appreciated ; and I think it would be best to defer its publica¬ 
tion in France to a more opportune time. 

I keep your pamphlet with joy, then, until the moment has 
come for publishing it: and I am very glad you have permitted 
me to extract certain facts from it. 

Pray accept, Sir, the expression of my thanks, and the assur¬ 
ance of my perfect consideration. 

Berryer. 


I pass over various letters from M. Berryer to Sir 
George Sinclair, which were written in continuation of 
the correspondence between the two distinguished men. 
The interval between 1849 and 1860 was a long one, but 
the letters of M. Berryer during those eleven years were 
chiefly of a friendly kind. In the subjoined letter from 
the brilliant Frenchman to Sir George, the former states 


302 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


his reasons for not accepting an invitation which the 
latter had given him to pay a visit to Thurso Castle. 
And in assigning as his reason for not bringing him¬ 
self to make even a temporary residence in the United 
Kingdom, that our Ministers had, by their acts, endorsed 
what he regarded as the usurpation of Louis Napoleon 
of the Throne of France, which in right belonged to the 
Comte de Chambord,-—M. Berryer will receive the res|)ect 
of men of all political opinions in this country. Such 
fidelity to his principles, such self-sacrifices for the cause 
with which M. Berryer had .identified himself, are so 
rare in the present day, that it does one's heart good 
when one meets with a case of the kind. The letter is 
dated— 

Angerville la Riviere, 

12th. November, 1860. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I owe you my thanks for sending me the ninth letter to 
M. Jules Favre. I read it with great interest and satisfaction, 
happy at finding in your writing the able expression of my own 
feelings. You have also been good enough to forward me a 
view of Thurso Castle. I should be very glad, if it were pos¬ 
sible, to go and view that fine demesne with my own eyes. I 
need not tell you that I should be delighted if the generous 
thought that occupies your mind were adopted, and that resi¬ 
dence could receive the guests to whom you offer so friendly an 
invitation. I desire to make known your intention in a quarter 
where I can also confidently represent the reasons which, in my 
opinion, ought to ensure the acceptance of your plans. I cannot 
dissemble the fact, however, that their realisation is not un¬ 
attended with difficulty and objection. Whatever liberty England 
may enjoy, the present policy of the country, and the language 
of your Ministers, present grave obstacles to an intention of 
taking up residence in the United Kingdom. Like you, I groan 
under inaction, but am not surprised at it, when the too general 
forgetfulness of the fundamental principles of right and of 



LETTER FROM M. BERRYER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 398 

honourable dealing in the affairs of this world places people 
oi heart and of good intentions in a state of sad isolation. Few 
enlightened minds, and few courageous friends, would be dis¬ 
posed now-a-days to second any noble effort. You display, my 
esteemed friend, a disposition, and a straightforwardness of 
character, which have become extremely rare, even in your 
free country. 

I had the honour, a few days ago, of addressing you, by 
the post, an article on the French Bar. I should be glad to 
know whether you received it. 

Accept, I beg you, my respectful and affectionate compli¬ 
ments. 

Your all-obedient Servant, 

Berryer. 

The next letter of M. Berryer to Sir George would 
have excited great interest, both here and on the Conti¬ 
nent, had it been made public at the time it was written, 
which was on the last day of December, 1860. At that 
time the King of Naples, or “ the brave young king,” 
as M. Berryer calls him, was “ nobly fighting against ” 
the “ revolutionists,” under Garibaldi; and he feels cer¬ 
tain that the Continental Powers which abandoned the 
young King of Naples on that occasion would one day 
find themselves similarly abandoned. He dwells, indeed, 
on the difficulties of Austria as having already begun, 
and predicts that they will go on increasing. His pro¬ 
phecies were speedily fulfilled; within four or five years 
Austria and Prussia were diplomatically at drawn daggers, 
and in 1866 confronted each other on the field of battle. 
With the issue all the world is acquainted. Austria was 
signally vanquished, humbled in the very lowest dust, 
and was bereft of the whole of her Italian dominions. M. 
Berryer lived to see all this; and the fulfilment of his pre¬ 
diction, that she would be abandoned by those in whom 


304 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


she trusted. She was completely abandoned by Louis 
Napoleon. The following is the letter :— 

Paris, 31st December, I860. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I received the two copies you were kind enough to send me, 
on the 21st inst., of your interesting and trenchant article on 
the Italian question. I could not help smiling at the idea you 
so happily borrow from our fabulist; though I could never take 
the Emperor of Austria for a rat withdrawn from the world to 
some profound and peaceful solitude. If that young sovereign 
shuts bis ear to appeals for help, it is because he has more need 
of it himself than any one else. The revolution by which his 
dominions are being agitated hardly leaves him leisure to think 
about the preservation of his friends, or his coming to their aid. 
This great House of Austria is now paying the penalty due to 
its adhesion to other revolutions. The year 1848 was to Austria 
a consequence of the welcome she gave to the Revolution of 
1830. In 1842, I predicted to Count Buol, in his office at 
Vienna, that his country would soon experience the results of 
the adhesion that he was not going to fail to give in to the 
new Empire. The logic of nations is inflexible, and the maxims 
whose triumph in other countries they see their Governments 
applaud, they are not slow in regarding as desirable for adoption 
by themselves. These consequences will gradually make them¬ 
selves felt eveiywhere ; and it is no guarantee for a power that 
it is insular, to be preserved from what is now called “ Progress.” 
The day will come when the sovereignties which abandon the 
young and brave King of Naples to the fortunes of a struggle 
which he so nobly sustains, will be reduced to the necessity of 
themselves making the same efforts, and will find themselves 
similarly abandoned in their moments of extreme peril. It is 
a dangerous error, even for States attached to different religions, 
not to perceive that the principle of the ancient sovereignty of 
the chief of the Roman Church, is the principle even of all the 
sovereignties existing in modern society. DU omen avertant! 

M. de Montalembert is still absent from Paris, and I have 
been unable to forward to him the copy which you intend for 
him. He shall have it as soon as he returns to town. 


LETTER FROM M. BERRYER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 395 

I renew, my esteemed friend, my very sincere and friendly 
compliments, and beg you to accept my best wishes at the 
commencement of the year. 

I am, with respect, 

Your very humble and obedient Servant, 

Berryer. 

Within three months of the date of the letter I have 
just given from M. Berryer to Sir George Sinclair, the 
former writes the following to the latter. It is a letter 
in which the distinguished Frenchman expresses himself 
in stronger terms in relation to the silence and inaction 
of the other European Powers,—while they see Louis 
Napoleon engaging in the most iniquitous enterprises,— 
than he does in any of the other letters from his pen now 
lying before me. His words in parts of this letter are 
words of burning indignation at seeing the most sacred 
rights rudely trampled under foot, and yet no remon¬ 
strance, even from any of those quarters in which there 
existed the right to utter their voice in disapprobation of 
what was going on. The date of this letter is— 

Angerville, April 22nd, 18G1. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I have received your last letter, and transmitted to M. de 
Montalembert the gazette which contains your excellent politi¬ 
cal reflections. I have, also, communicated to several of my 
friends the curious and witty “ adaptation ” you have made of 
some scenes in the “ Medea ” of Corneille to the shameful suit 
which Prince Napoleon is carrying on against his brother, the 
son of Miss Patterson. Yet you have received no answer from 
me, and, until now, you may have doubted whether the post has 
been faithful to you, and has not deprived me of your missives. 
I have not had the honour of writing you because, for more than 
five weeks, I have been extremely unwell, and have been con¬ 
demned to abstain from every kind of occupation. It was 
painful for me’to be seated at my desk, and to try to write. I 
have at this moment been ordered to the country for change of 




896 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

air, and to live in repose and silence. It may be that the public 
journals have said something of my illness, and of my absence 
from Paris. You will thus have explained to yourself my silence; 
but I desire to make my excuses to you, and beg you to be as¬ 
sured that I should be deeply afflicted by the cessation of our 
correspondence, and of the friendly relations which you permit 
me to have with you. They have for me the charm of an ex¬ 
change of mutual sentiments, and of similar convictions as to 
the sad affairs of this world. 

I am not surprised at the language of your friend—a Repub¬ 
lican, a Frenchman, an exile ! Like him, I think very Corneillean 
the capital line ■ 

“ And you think you love in only hating- feebly.” 

Yes; to detest too little the ruin of liberties, the lying 
despotism, and a double-faced policy, is almost to have con¬ 
sideration for the authors of all the wrong that is now being 
done in this world, and that menaces the future still more 
cruelly. The inaction and the silence of those who, to preserve 
our unhappy country from such a future, ought energetically to 
summon to their side every man of intelligence and heart, and 
every friend of freedom, to whatever rank he might belong, or 
under whatever flag he might hitherto have ranged himself— 
this inaction and this silence, I say, are a great calamity. But 
what are we to think of, and how much should we not lament, 
the blindness of all the sovereigns of Europe in abandoning the 
most sacred rights to the most unjust enterprises ; suffering the 
fundamental principles of all society to be violated; outraging 
the maxims of honour as well as the sacred enactments of the law 
of nations, and assisting without protest at the ruin of causes 
the most just: a ruin which soon will extend to themselves ! 
And lastly, if we are to be pained by the inaction and the 
silence of the proscrits, the exiles, and the disarmed; and if we 
are to cast reproaches at them; what accusations ought not to 
be brought in the name of humanity against those who have in 
their hands authority, freedom of action, and all the resources 
of power ? Tell me, my dear and esteemed friend, what you 
think of the language and cordial ententes of your statesmen 
—of the men who are the leaders of Old England ? 


LETTER FROM M. BERRYER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 397 

At this moment, nevertheless, people are very much moved 
by the publication of the letter of Monseigneur the Duke 
d’Aumale, addressed to Prince Napoleon. I do not pause to 
notice what is superfluous, or what is deficient, in this document, 
which is otherwise remarkable ; but certainly the reply given 
by it to the coarse insults offered by the princely orator to the 
great and noble House of Bourbon is vigorous, able, and cannot 
fail to produce good effects in France. You must certainly have 
read it. Your journals ought either to have translated, or to 
have reproduced it. What do you think of it yourself, and what 
is thought of it in England ? 

It has been supposed in Paris that Napoleon was about to 
descend from the heights of the Imperial throne, to send, in his 
own name, and in that of his cousin the Emperor, a challenge 
to the exiled Duke ! If the landing of this personage—who 
cares little about handling the sword—should indeed take place 
on British territory, I would entreat you to send me word of it 
in all haste. 

Adieu, my esteemed friend. I repeat my excuses for my 
forced silence, and beg you to retain your friendship for me, and 
to believe the affectionate respect with which 

I am your obedient Servant, 

Berryer. 

The next letter of M. Berryer which I transfer to these 
pages was written on the 16th June in the same year, 
1861, from his country residence at Angerville la Biviere. 
It is one of unusual interest, both with respect to the 
writer's professional affairs, and general politics. The 
more eminent barristers of our own country will aj3pre- 
ciate the observations of M. Berryer when he speaks of 
the monopolising claims which their professional duties 
have on their time and attention. A successful barrister 
is, probably,—speaking in relation to mental labour,—one 
of the most hard-wrought men of the day. And yet, in 
almost every instance, it will be found that our most 
odfted and most successful members of the bar take, of 

O ' 




398 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


all other classes of the community, the deepest interest 
in the great political questions of the hour, and make 
themselves more conversant with the literature of the age 
than any others. Though all our eminent British bar¬ 
risters cannot,—it may be doubted whether one of them 
could,—boast of the brilliant position to which M. Berryer 
had attained in his own country, yet they can heartily 
acquiesce in everything he says on the delight which they 
take in their profession, notwithstanding all the tods and 
all the anxieties which are incident to it. In giving this 
letter I can easily conceive with what pleasure it will be 
read by all who belong to the same noble profession as 
himself,—a profession whose great maxim is to sacri¬ 
fice every personal or friendly feeling to the one great 
principle of feeling for the moment that his client is his 
world, and that should the falling of the heavens be the 
consequence of his efforts to achieve the triumph of his 
clients cause, he is to put forth all his energies,—is to 
bring to bear all the powers of his mind,—with the view 
of accomplishing that object. M. Berryer’s letter is, as I 
have said, dated— 

Angerville la Riviere, IGtli June, 1861. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I am ashamed at not having yet replied to your last and very 
friendly letters, and particularly to tliat of the 28th of May. 
Do not, however, censure my silence. I have so little liberty,— 
so many occupations absorb almost every hour of every one of 
my days,—that I cannot be reproached with culpable neglect. 
I have, besides, just been making several journeys, to plead in 
causes, far from Paris ; and I have hardly been able to catch a 
few moments’ repose here, to prepare me for fresh judiciary 
contests. I am not in the least a man of leisure ; and I per¬ 
ceive by your friendly reproaches, and by the very kind invita¬ 
tion which you send me, to what an extent you are unaware of 


LETTER FROM M. BERRYER TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 390 


what my existence is in France, through revolutions which have 
separated me from the royal government—the only one I could 
consent to serve—and have imposed upon me the regime of 
other governments, such as that which now rules us, and from 
which my invariable principles keep me conscientiously aloof. 
Having no personal fortune, I only maintain my position in the 
world by incessant labour in my profession as an advocate. 
Such a life, so entirely laborious, is altogether honourable, and 
it is for that reason that I am attached to it, and do not cease 
to practise it. I find in it—that which is my first want—a 
complete independence, and, under the regime of press-slavery, 
rather frequent occasions for manifesting before the tribunals 
my sentiments, my convictions, and my desires. But this entire 
liberty of my mind, and occasionally of my speech, is not liberty 
to me for disposing of my time at my own will. I owe that 
time to the causes with which I am entrusted, and to duties 
which my age, already far advanced, render more difficult and 
more slow. 

I have but few moments to devote to my friends. Corre¬ 
spondence which would delight my heart to indulge in, must 
inevitably be a little neglected ; and, to my regret, I could not 
undertake such a journey as you so kindly propose to me. I 
should be very glad if it were permitted me to pass a long time 
in your beautiful retreat, and to enjoy there your erudite con¬ 
versation. The expression of your principles, which are also mine, 
would be a great solace to my mind, and one most acceptable 
to the grave sorrow caused me every day by the events which 
take place in the world, and make it resound with the odious 
maxims which we see triumph in too many minds. 

I am, believe me, most sensible of the numerous marks of 
esteem and kindness which you offer me, and I should wish to 
respond to them, and be able to convey my thanks to you vivd 
voce. My slavery is a sorrow to me, and I do not exclaim with 
you, that 

“ Malgre la rigneur d’un si cruel pouvoir, 

Mon unique souhait est de ne rien pouvoir.” 

Accept, I beg, my excuses and my regrets, my esteemed 
friend, and receive the homage of my affectionate respect. 

Berryer. 


100 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

The next letter from M. Berryer to Sir George Sinclair 
which I select from the collection before me, embraces an 
unusual variety of topics, all of them more or less in¬ 
teresting. Those portions of it which refer to the refined 
enjoyments which are derived from intimate intercourse 
with persons of similar sentiments and sympathies, are 
exceedingly beautiful. The letter bears date, 8th July, 
1861 

MY ESTEEMED FRIEND, 

I could not describe to you how deeply I have been touched 
by the flattering, obliging, and friendly sentiments with which 
your last letter is filled. It is a handsome and ample recom¬ 
pense for the labours and the sacrifices of my life, to have been 
able to obtain such expressions of esteem; if, indeed, I have 
merited the eulogiums which you bestow upon me. I have it 
at heart, I assure you, to reply to your invitation, and to be able 
to tender to you my acknowledgments viva voce. I feel how 
much pleasure I should have in passing some time in your 
society, enjoying your conversation, and mingling my desires 
and my regrets with your own. If, on a stormy day, it is plea¬ 
sant for a traveller to meet a companion who comes to escape 
the tempest under the same shelter; still more delightful is it, 
in times of calamity and public disorder, to allow one’s heart 
and one’s mind in the friendship of a man of enlightenment and 
of honour, in whose company thoughts are unfolded and ex¬ 
changed deliberately and in entire freedom. The relations, full 
of confidence, and distinguished by the absence of restraint, 
which your kindness has originated between us, have become 
fortified from day to day, and are dear to me, though I have 
not yet had the honour of seeing you, and though I have not 
yet been able to cross the Straits which separate us. There is, 
however, a great charm that attracts me to you. The tie is a 
powerful one which is formed by the contact of two good natures, 
animated by the same zeal for the triumph of the same cause. 
Idem velle, idem nolle, ea demumfirma est amicitia. 

Such an association of ideas relative to the judgments to be 
passed, and the measures to be taken, on the affairs of the 


LETTER FROM M. BERRYER, 


401 


political world, leaves more independence to the mind of every 
one, and gives a higher authority to personal convictions, when 
that association springs up between tw r o men who, belonging to 
tw T o different nations, may be actuated by dissimilar interests, 
and do not look at the same faces of things, nor contemplate 
them from the same point of view. There is in this diversity 
of situations a useful control over the correctness of impressions, 
and the truth of final conclusions. 

A stranger to France, you have studied from afar, and during 
a long course of years, her wants, her faults, her miseries, her 
resources ; and you have formed, in reference to the preservation 
of the well-being and the dignity of this dear and beautiful 
country, the same convictions as myself, who have never left 
it, and who have devoted my life to this same study of its 
past, its joresent, and its future. You have conveyed to Mon¬ 
seigneur the Due d’Aumale the thought which has been the 
guide of my persevering efforts during more than twelve years, 
and I am happy that H.E.H. has returned you such an 
answer. 

I am not surprised at the generous approval which he has 
expressed at the witty parallels you have established between 
some of the best scenes of our great dramatic writers and con¬ 
temporary events, and the language of men who are nothing but 
melancholy parodists of the grandeur of the past. Your stinging 
applications of the fine sayings of Corneille and Racine to the 
vulgarities and the criminal scandals of the personages of our 
political dramas, prove that you know our literature as well as 
you do our history. 

Your literary taste, my esteemed friend, would lend a powerful 
and additional charm to the pleasure of passing some time in 
your retreat; but for this year, in spite of all that attracts me 
to it, I shall be prevented from leaving home during my ensuing 
periodical vacation. Family affairs to adjust, imperative duties 
to complete, and the residence with me of my daughter-in-law, 
and of my grandson whom I cherish, will, I trust, render accep¬ 
table to you my excuses and my regrets. I address to you, at 
the same time, my earnest desire that greater liberty may be 
granted me next year, and that I shall soon have the happiness 
of seeing you in person. 


D D 


402 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Receive, I beg, my esteemed friend, the respectful and sin¬ 
cerely affectionate compliments of 

Your bumble and very obedient Servant, 

Berryer. 

The next letter from M. Berryer to Sir George adverts 
to various topics both of English and European interest. 
At the time it was written, namely, in the year 1861, 
great interest was taken in this country in the Volunteer 
movement, then comparatively in its infancy, but now a 
great fact,—so great, indeed, that it may be regarded as 
one of the institutions of the country. Sir George, whose 
bosom ever overflowed with patriotic feelings, addressed, 
a short time before this, the Volunteers of Caithness. 
That address attracted much attention, and in all quarters 
where it was known inspired the greatest admiration, 
alike for the love of country which it breathed, and the 
beauty of the diction in which Sir George s sentiments 
were expressed. References were made in this address 
to an apprehension, which at that time very generally 
prevailed among us, that Louis Napoleon meditated an 
invasion of our shores. These prefatory observations will 
render more intelligible than they would otherwise have 
been some of the allusions made in M. Berryers letter. 


Angerville la Riviere, 

August 13th, 18G1. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I am still behindhand with my thanks, and beg you to pardon 
me for it. Bo not attribute it to my negligence, but to the 
imperious necessities of a life which leaves me no leisure. I 
have been more occupied than ever during the month which has 
just elapsed. I have been several times absent from home, and 
your letters have been sent to me somewhat late. I have, at 
any rate, been able to read the excellent address which you have 
made to the Volunteers of your county. I admire the patriotic 



LETTER FROM M. BERRYER. 


403 


spirit wliicb has led to the formation of, and which animates, 
these new corps. This militia, so promptly and so well organ¬ 
ised, is a fine spectacle, and we can only applaud the generous 
sentiments that inspire harangues such as yours. While extol¬ 
ling on this head the British character, I do not believe that the 
moment is near when any invasive enterprise would be at¬ 
tempted against your country. The man who weighs down our 
destinies no doubt labours to scatter abroad in Europe the 
elements of, and the incentives to, disorder and revolution. 
But whatever may be the nature of the mission he believes to 
be reserved for him of avenging Waterloo, England is certainly 
the last power with which he would risk going to war. 

Independently of all questions of present policy, I feel myself 
animated for my own country by the sentiments which you hold 
so nobly in your heart for yours. There is between us a great 
conformity of principles and of impressions, and I glory in the 
fact that two men who have never met should have, in their 
hearts and in their enlightenment, so many points of intimate 
contact. I am flattered and touched by this rapprochement, 
and could not sufficiently convey to you how grateful I am for 
the affectionate terms, and for the kindness of your letter. Yes, 
I should experience a profound delight in passing some time 
with you, and I desire that that pleasure may be reserved for 
me in the coming year. In the genial calm of your solitude, 
and in the unfolding of our mutual attachment, we should give 
ourselves up to pleasant conversations upon all the convictions 
which unite us. But while philosophising, I reserve to myself 
the duty of saying to you that there is not, in my opinion, any 
moral or social truth that our Sorbonne has ignored. Let us 
never compromise by our judgments the constant and funda¬ 
mental doctrines by confounding them with the errors which 
the passions or the weakness of some men have initiated and 
sustained. 

I have to offer you, also, the thanks of my daughter-in-law, 
who has been delighted with the charming veil which you have 
sent me for her. She will adorn herself with it some other 
time, but at present she is in deep mourning for her father, 
whom she has just had the misfortune to lose. 

You have made me a precious gift in favouring me with a 

D D 2 


404 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


copy of the letter of Mon seigneur the Due de Nemouis. I 
have read it with pleasure, and thank you for it. 

Accept, I beg you, with all my thanks, the very sincere 
assurance of my profound respect, and of my very affectionate 
sentiments. 

Your obedient Servant, 


Berryer. 










Foliowin°’ close on the above letter is another. The 

o 

M. Victor Sclioelcher referred to in it was at four suc¬ 
cessive elections under the Republic, chosen a member of 
the Corps Legislatif. But as I shall have to make a 
quotation from one of his letters after I have concluded 
my extracts from M. Berryer’s correspondence with Sir. 
George, I defer my observations relative to M. Victor 
Sclioelcher until then. The following letter is dated, 

“ Angerville la Riviere, September 12th, 18G1 ”— 

My esteemed Friend, 

I hasten to thank you for kindly communicating to me your 
letter of the 7th of this month to M. Victor Sclioelcher. I read 
it with real satisfaction, and admire the wisdom of the counsels 
you give to a man who has all the intelligence, and I believe 
also, all the sincerity, that could ensure acceptance for them. 
Such correspondence must be a consolation for him who has the 
misfortune of being exiled from his country. It is pleasant, in 
so cruel a separation from one’s countrymen, to find a foreigner 
taking a generous and earnest interest in the future of the 
country from which he is cut off. I thank you for the kindness 
with which you keep up this affectionate intercourse with those 
of my countrymen whose misfortune I sincerely deplore, how¬ 
ever widely divergent maybe our political opinions, and however 
bitter may be the memory of the wrong done to our France by 
many men of the Republican party, in showing, by their con¬ 
duct and their language, that they dreaded less the return of the 
Imperial regime, than the re-establishment of the Monarchy. 

I beg to tell you, also, that all your ideas as to the necessity, 
in order to preserve the French nation from a deplorable future, 



LETTER FROM M. BERRYER. 


405 


of cementing a union among independent men, whom past 
events have divided, and whom the existing state of things 
ought to re-unite—your own ideas, I say, are the complete 
expression of the sentiments which inspire and direct my efforts 
each day. At a distance, 3^011 judge truly of the condition into 
which our country has fallen. Failing the restoration of consti¬ 
tutional royalty, this country' will remain the prey of the 
alternative triumphs of anarchy and despotism. 

Receive, my esteemed friend, with my sincere thanks, the 
compliments of my very affectionate respect. 

Berryer. 

The next letter from M. Berryer to Sir George, is in 
answer to one from the latter. It chiefly relates to 
literary matters. Its date is “ Angerville, October 24 th, 

1861 

My esteemed Friend, 

On my return home, after a few journeys, I received your 
despatch of the 19 th October. You could not make me a more 
welcome present than that of this little photograph of a portrait 
executed, you tell me, nearly thirty }^ears ago. I delight to 
trace in these handsome traits of your youth the rectitude, the 
nobility, the intelligent firmness of disposition, which your cor¬ 
respondence and your writings have made me acquainted with. 
Time has been unable to change them, and you, indeed, are that 
which you were. You have no occasion to hold the language of 
Don Diego, and } t ou preserve the strength, and retain the senti¬ 
ments, of young men. I am surprised, also, at your finding fault 
with the resolution of the princes. At their age, one braves 
Fate ; one is not sparing of noble blood; one does not desire 

" Attendre chez son pcre une obscure vieillesse.” * 

The burden of exile is too heavy. I can only praise this 
demand for free action and daring enterprise. It is impossible, 
I admit, to imagine a conflict more deplorable than that in 
which they have taken part; and I can anticipate from it no 
other issue than misfortunes similar to those of St. Domingo. 

* To await an obscure old age at home. 


406 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


The difficulty of the undertaking will lie in coming forth from 
it with all personal dignity preserved ; but the movement which 
impels them to defend a federation formed with the concurrence 
of our arms, and under the protection of the old French Hag, I 
cannot find it in my heart to blame. On such questions, I think 
a la Francaise. 

No ; your letters to the Republican correspondent—the copies 
of them, at any rate—have not been intercepted. With regard 
to the happy reproduction of the scene from Agrippina and 
Nero, I have got it read. It has been taken from me for the 
purpose of being thrown into circulation; and I have heard 
many persons of a humorous turn of mind laughingly repeat 
the line—“Goyon! qu’on obeisse aux ordres de ma mere.” 
(Goyon ; let my mother’s orders be obeyed.) 

Meanwhile, and desiring that it may be given me to have the 
liberty of going to see you, I send you my respectful and very 
sincere conrpliments; and in order that on our first meeting 
we may recognise one another as old acquaintances, on my 
return to Paris I mean to have my photograph taken, and shall 
then take the liberty of sending you a copy of it. Lord 
Brougham has written me, that, in London, the photographer 
Mayall has jmoduced one which is thought to be a good like¬ 
ness. 

Your very obedient and affectionate Servant, 

Berryer. 

Passing over two letters written by M. Berryer to Sir 
George after the date of the letter I have just given, I 
transfer to this volume one of general interest, dated from 
the country residence of the former at Angerville. 

Aiigerville la Riviere, 

December 19,1861. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I have been unable to acknowledge the receipt of your com¬ 
munication of the second of this month. I only had your parcel 
on arriving here a few days ago. The article on the present de* 
plorable state of the finances of France came very a propos on 
the anniversary of the coup d'etat, to which we owe this frighL 





LETTER FROM M. BERRYER. 


407 


ful expenditure, and this situation which menaces our near 
future. It is much to he feared that the public credit, already 
shaken, will suffer much from the embarrassments of the Trea¬ 
sury. Will not American affairs be the subject of one of those 
extraordinary credits, of which we seem to desire the abandon¬ 
ment of the system ? Be sure, also, that our austere Senate 
will oppose its august master’s stripping himself of a prero¬ 
gative by which he had, in his constitution, very wisely provided 
for his absolute power, and of which he has made so magnificent 
ause. Are we not about to hear of war? Will not France 
side with you ? Assuredly the Americans will not consent to 
make any serious reparation for the insult offered to the British 
flag; and your ministers will prove to your Imperial ally that 
the outrage is shared by him, inasmuch as the “ Trent ” carried 
a plenipotentiary sent to France. And lastly, cotton, the tariffs, 
and all the elements of moral order of this day will be brought 
into play, and our cotton manufacture will be held to be not 
less interested than yours in the affairs of the South. So much 
the better ! if all that would only lead to some denouement, and 
to the fall of the curtain upon the pitiable drama of which we 
are the sad spectators. 

I shall return to Paris in a few days, and shall see my confrere 
M. Jules Favre, to whom I shall communicate the curious docu¬ 
ments which you have done me the honour of confiding to me. 

In making me grow old, will not God permit me to become 
indifferent to the miseries and the scandals of the present day, 
and to end my days in intercourse only witli men of heart, of 
honour, and of enlightenment, more concerned with the arts, with 
letters, with justice, and with the eternal beauties of creation, 
than with contemporary affairs ? 

I should be very glad to have, at length, the pleasure next 
year of going to see you in England; and since sad 1861 is 
drawing to a close, I wish that you will commence, and pass 
through, with all good fortune, the year which is about to 
succeed it. 

Receive, my esteemed friend, my respectful and very affec¬ 
tionate compliments, 


Berryer. 


408 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I come now to a very important event in the career of 
M. Berryer. It will he remembered by most of the readers 
of this volume that in 1864 the Benchers of the Middle 
Temple invited M. Berryer, as the most distinguished 
member of the French bar, to a banquet in their grand 
Hall in the Temple. It was a splendid affair, and alike 
creditable to the Bar of England and the French Bar,— 
the latter represented in the person of M. Berryer. The 
event created great and general interest at the time ; and 
the proceedings at the magnificent banquet were reported 
at great length in all the journals of the day. The 
following letter from M. Berryer himself to Sir George ' 
Sinclair, giving his own account of the event, will be 
read with interest :— 

Paris, 10th December, 1SG4. 

My esteemed Friend, 

I did not know until tlie last moment, on the eve of the day 
on which I left Paris to proceed to London, what day had been 
fixed for the banquet. You live so far off that I could not ven¬ 
ture to ask you to undertake so long a journey in so inclement 
a season, and I felt the deepest regret at being unable myself to 
go to you. My absence from Paris, however, could only be very 
short : indeed, the days were counted for me—I might almost 
say the hours. I hope to return to England in the ensuing 
spring, and then, more fortunate than now, to he able to gratify 
my longing desire to pass a few moments in your society. 
Meanwhile I rely upon the pleasure of receiving tidings of you, 
and* of learning that you have less to complain of as to your 
health. I observe with admiration, too, the prodigious activity 
of mind which you preserve, notwithstanding your sufferings. 

The extract from the Morning Advertiser , which you have 
been so good as to add to your letter, affords me a fresh proof 
of it. Allow me to say, however, that while you evince the 
warmest friendship for me, you have been a great deal too hard 
on the Attorney-General. I regarded his toast as the fulfilment 
of a common-place formality, usual at such meetings. No cheer 


LETTER FROM M. BERRYER. 


40'J 


followed it, and I could remain in my chair unmoved and ex¬ 
tremely indifferent. I felt, too, that the Attorney-General’s 
tone and manner were perfectly gracious, and that his language, 
irrespective of the official toast, was most friendly to me, and 
did me great honour. On this occasion, therefore, I think 
Verax was a little too susceptible. 

At this season of storms and tempests you do well to prefer 
the old and lumbering post-conveyance to the light vessels 
which the winds and the seas drive on the shore, or too fre¬ 
quently submerge. I shall hear with joy that you and all your 
family have had a pleasant journey. 

Accept, my dear and esteemed friend, my sincerely respectful 
and affectionate compliments, 

Berryer. 

It would appear that Sir George Sinclair had written 
to M. Berryer, disapproving of something which Sir 
Fitzroy Kelly—then Attorney-General, but now Lord 
Chief Baron—had either done or left undone, as the 
member of the English Bar under whose auspices the 
whole affair was got up. My impression is, that the 
ground of Sir George’s dissatisfaction was, that com¬ 
pliments had been paid to Louis Napoleon to which lie 
took exception. But to whatever the reference may have 
been, M. Berryer vindicates the Attorney-General—now, 
as I have said, the Lord Chief Baron—and expresses his 
approval of all that he said and did on the occasion. 

There must have been something exceedingly in¬ 
teresting in the study of M. Berryer’s mental constitution. 
Surprise at the supremacy of iniquity in particular forms 
and under certain circumstances, appears to have been at 
all times blended with a firm faith in the speedy triumph 
of truth and justice. This again appears in a letter to Sir 
George, under date, August 23rd, 1865. “ The triumph 
of evil,” he says, “ is a great problem in this world, and 





410 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 


under the hand of the Sovereign Master of all that is good. 
But,” he adds, “ these triumphs of iniquity are always of 
short duration, and the success of the wicked, of liars, and 
of tricksters, is, after all, but ephemeral. May we belong 
to the number of those whom God destines to survive ex¬ 
isting iniquity.” The “ liar ” and “ trickster ” here referred 
to as destined to have but a brief reign, and as being the 
impersonation of iniquity, is Louis Napoleon. The prayer 
of M. Berryer that he and Sir George Sinclair might be 
found amongst those who were destined to see the down¬ 


fall of Napoleonistic iniquity, was not answered, so far as 
regarded themselves ; but, though neither of them has 
lived to see it, that prayer has been already in part heard 
in relation to all who are alive at the present day, and 
will most certainly before long be heard and answered to 
its fullest extent. He who, according to M. Berryer and 
Sir George Sinclair, is the “ mystery of iniquity,” is in a 
very different position now from what he was four years 
ago, when this aspiration of the former was conveyed to 
the latter. One half of his power has been swept away, 
and the other half is undergoing the same vanishing 
process with a rapidity which must be astounding to 
himself, as it manifestly is the source of joy to his 
subjects. 

In another letter to Sir George, under date, Paris, 9 th 
Feb., 1866, M. Berryer denounces in severe terms the 
conduct of what he calls the “ speculating charlatans ” 
by whom Louis Napoleon was at the time surrounded, 
and confidently predicts the ruinous consequences of 
their corruption, both to the Imperial regime and the 
country. I give an extract from this letter. M. Berryer 
says:— 









LETTER FROM M. BERRYER. 


411 


From your distant retreat you contemplate calmly the affairs 
of the world, and judge them with a matured mind. The 
spectacle of the energetic and patriotic efforts made by the 
Americans in their Civil War; the power of united wills in 
that democracy; the perseverance, and the spirit of self-sacrifice, 
contrasting so strongly with the inconsistency, the weakness, 
the absence of principle, and the loss of dignity of most of the 
sovereigns of Europe ; the cowardice and the venality of their 
ministers; alike forbid our doubting of the great and rapid 
progress that the democratic spirit will make among the nations 
of Europe. The consequences of this situation will be more 
grave and more rapid than were those of the American War of 
Independence, twenty years before the close of the last century, 
on the affairs of Europe, and of France in particular. 

You appreciate truly, moreover, the character and the worth 
of the speculating charlatans who now govern us. In France, 
all affairs now depend upon some operation at the Bourse; and 
we should not now be in the serious and discreditable embarrass¬ 
ment that weighs upon the French Government, if it had not 
been found necessary to undertake the Mexican War to procure 
for familiar friends of the Emperor, bearers of Jecker Bonds, 
the means of having that paper paid off,—bought though it was 
for a trifle. Those bonds have been paid, and now these same 
gentlemen are making a great noise about the necessity of 
recalling the expeditionary army, after first providing the means 
of enabling Maximilian to vegetate at Mexico, or to return with 
some millions to his estate at Miramar. 

Yet a little more time and patience, and we shall witness the 
fall of all these lying powers. But what will be their lot ? It 
does not signify. Our own condition, in point of honour, of 
freedom, of morality, could not be worse than it now is. May 
God vouchsafe to us the consolation of beholding the punish¬ 
ment of these perjuries, and we will say the Nunc dimittis 
without regret. It would, however, be a last and bitter sorrow, 
to find oneself separated from good. Do not fail to let me hear 
often the state of your valuable health. 

The ultimate results of the state of things to which M. 
Berryer here refers, predicted by him, are certainly, if 


412 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


appearances may be relied on, in a fair way of being 
speedily witnessed. 

In the same year, namely, in 1866, Sir George Sinclair 
appears to have written to M. Berryer to the effect that 
lie had met, one day in the streets of Edinburgh, Charles 
the Tenth, when an exile in this country. Charles the 
Tenth, as has been stated in more places than one in this 
volume, was the grandfather of the present Count de 
Chambord, the personal friend of M. Berryer, and in the 
view of the latter, the legitimate Sovereign of France. 
The mention of the incident seems to have stirred his 
very soul. Writing to Sir George on the 2nd of May, 
1866, M. Berryer thus expresses himself:—“ Your last 
letter has gone to my heart, and I have been deeply 
moved by the very touching and truly noble description 
you give of the impressions made upon you on meeting, 
in the streets of Edinburgh, the old King Charles X.; the 
proscribed, the high-minded man, the amiable Prince, 
the worthy descendant of the greatest and most illus¬ 
trious of Royal families. You make me share your 
emotions, and with you I repeat— 

“ Un soupir, 

Ce n’est pas trop pour un tel souvenir.” * 

There is something very touching in this. It shows 
how profound was M. Berryer’s attachment to the elder 
branch of the Bourbon family. 

M. Berryer s next letter to Sir George Sinclair, dated 
the 30th of May of the next year, 1867, furnishes us 
with a proof of the severity of the system adopted in 
France under the Napoleonic regime to exclude from the 
knowledge of the people of that country foreign events 

* A sigh, 

’Iis not too much for such a souvenir. 



DEATH OF M. BERRYER. 


413 


discreditable, or which might be likely to be injurious, to 
tiie Imperial dynasty. M. Berryer in this letter writes 
as follows:— 

The entrance of foreign news into France is so carefully inter¬ 
dicted, that it is not possible for us to know the truth as to events. 
It is only under the form of an on dit that we hear of the cap¬ 
tivity of Maximilian. You would oblige me if you would inform 
me for certain what the rebel Juarez is doing with the pretended 
Emperor, the invader of his country. What will he the fate of 
this Archduke-prisoner? I have left Paris, where people don’t 
trouble themselves about so trifling a matter, and only care 
about balls, banquets, and receptions of such an odd collection 
of sovereigns en 'promenade. I have not yet heard that the 
King of the Belgians has thought of indignantly withdrawing, 
on learning the captivity of his brother-in-law 7 . I hold to the 
belief, though, that the Emperor of Austria will not come to com¬ 
pliment the projector of the Mexican expedition. As for the 
sovereigns of Russia and Prussia, their coming seems to me 
much more like a contemptuous and sneering mystification, 
than an act of politeness. This strange concourse of Europe at 
Paris may possibly have no other object in view than that of 
extinguishing, in the hauteur of such visits, the warlike thoughts 
of the Man of Projects. 

The above extract is from the last letter written by M. 
Berryer to Sir George Sinclair which I find among the 
papers of the latter. Others may have been received by 
Sir George from his distinguished French friend, though 
not preserved, as they may have solely consisted of those 
expressions of friendship which they were in the habit of 
interchanging with each other. M. Berryer, like the 
subject of this biography, has also passed away from this 
world, acknowledged to be, and mourned as, one of the 
most illustrious sons of whom France could boast. It is 
an interesting fact that M. Berryer only survived a few 
weeks, after an intimate correspondence of nearly twenty 


414 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


years, Sir George Sinclair, tlie friend whom he so highly 
esteemed, alike for his remarkable intellectual attainments 
and his eminent moral worth. 

Mr. Gruneisen, the intimate friend of both these 
eminent men, wrote to me, in reference to this fact, the 
following interesting letter immediately after the death 
of M. Berryer. I ought to observe that the allusion in 
the first part of Mr. Gruneisen s letter is to a tribute 
which I paid to the memory of Sir George Sinclair in a 
morning journal which is under my editorial control. In 
the columns of that journal Mr. GruneiseiTs letter, in 
accordance with his wishes, duly appeared. “Having,” 
he said, writing to me from the Junior Carlton Club, on 
December 2, 1868, “perused, with great interest, your 
touching tribute to the memory of the late Sir George 
Sinclair, of Thurso Castle, with whose friendship I was 
honoured, I am sure you will be pleased to publish in 
your journal the last letter I ever received from the 
distinguished advocate, M. Berryer, in reply to my com¬ 
munication to him announcing the sad news of the de¬ 
cease of Sir George Sinclair, followed, alas ! so soon by the 
death of Berryer himself. I was on my way to visit him 
at the Chateau d’Angerville, during a journey abroad, but I 
heard of his serious illness at Berlin, the news of which was 
confirmed on my arrival at Paris, which M. Berryer left for 
his chateau the day before I reached the French capital. 

“ To lose within such a short period two such noble 
characters as Berryer and Sir George Sinclair, both con¬ 
sistent in their political principles, equally remarkable for 
their varied attainments, and both loved and respected in 
all the relations of private life—is, indeed, a heavy blow 
in this age of expediency and selfishness.” 



LETTER FROM M. BERRYER TO MR. GRUNEISEN. 415 


The following is the letter from M. Berryer to which 
Mr. Gruneisen alludes :— 

Sancerre, 15 Octre., 18G8. 

Mon cher Monsieur Gruneisen, 

Je re^ois avec un vrai chagrin la nouvelle que vous me donnez 
de la triste fin de Sir Georges Sinclair. J’etais depuis de longues 
anndes en correspondance affectueuse avec lui. J’honorais ses 
sentimens, j’estimais son savoir, et je partageais avec bonheur 
de ses opinions sur les choses passees et ses jugemens sur les 
affaires prdsentes. Nous nous sommes vus et embrasses pour 
la premiere fois lorsqu’il a traversd Paris en se rendant a Cannes, 
d’ou il me donnait des nouvelles d’un autre cher et illustre ami, 
Lord Brougham, que je regrette aussi bien profondement. 

J’ai dcrit il y a peu de temps a Miss Sinclair pour avoir des 
nouvelles de la sante de son pere. Ma lettre etait addressee a 
Thurso Castle. Je ne savais pas que Sir Georges eut dte lui- 
merne a Edimbourg, et croirais que sa fille seule avait etd y 
clrercher un medecin. Transmette lui, je vous prie, mes con- 
doleances. J’attendrai quelque temps encore pour lui parler de 
sa douleur. 

Recevez, mon cher Monsieur Gruneisen, les complimens bien 
sin ceres de ma vieille amitie. 

Berryer. 

J’ai a vous rdmercier des curieux envois que vous m’avez faits 
par la poste, qui a dte fidele, en depit de la vigilance du police. 

The following is the translation of the above letter 
from M. Berryer. 

My dear Mr. Gruneisen, 

It is with sincere sorrow I receive the news which you give 
me of the sad end of Sir George Sinclair. For many years I 
was in kindly corresjjondence with him. I honoured his senti¬ 
ments, I respected his learning, and I warmly sympathised with 
his opinions on the past and his judgment on the present. We 
met and exchanged friendly greetings for the first time when he 
passed through Paris on his way to Cannes, from whence he gave 
me news of the death of another dear and illustrious friend, Lord 
Brougham, whose loss I also deeply deplore. 


41G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE ^SINCLAIR, BART. 


I wrote a short time since to Miss Sinclair for tidings of the 
health of her father. My letter was addressed to Thurso Castle. 


I did not know that Sir George was himself in Edinburgh, and 
thought that only his daughter had gone there to fetch a phy¬ 
sician. Pray send my condolence to her. I will wait a little 
time to write to her of her great loss. 

Receive, my dear Mr. Gruneisen, the most sincere compli¬ 


ments of my long friendship. 


Berryer. 


I have to thank you for the curious things you have sent me 
through .the post-office, which has been faithful despite of police 
vigilance.* 

It is not improbable that this letter to Mr. Gruneisen 
was among the last M. Berryer ever wrote to friends 
beyond the confines of his own family. There is some¬ 
thing very affecting in the fact that he who thus deplores 
the death of a dear friend, should, within a few weeks, 
leave not only his personal friends, but all France, to 
mourn over liis own departure from this world. 

There is another eminent Frenchman with whom Sir 
George Sinclair carried on a large correspondence, and 
with whom he was for a series of years on terms of great 
personal intimacy. I allude to M. Victor Sehoelcher, well 
known in this country as the author of the “ Life of 
Handel; ” a work which the higher class of our periodical 
journals, such as the Edinburgh Review , the Quarterly 
Review , the Westminster Review, the Athenaeum , and the 
Spectator , were unanimous in pronouncing to be the best 
Life of that celebrated composer which had been ever writ¬ 
ten. M. Victor Sehoelcher is one of the most extreme of 

* This postscript refers to the sending of cuttings from certain English 
journals, the stoppage of which was almost certain hy the French police. — 
C. L, G. 


LETTER FROM M. VICTOR SCHCELCHER. 


417 


French Republicans, and having taken part in the streets 
against Louis Napoleon, at the time of the coup d'etat, 
he has ever since been an exile in this country. During 
the last Republic in France, M. Schoelcher sat for three 
successive sessions in the Corps Legislatif for one of the 
French colonies, for which he was Under Secretary 
during the secretaryship of M. Arago. When filling that 
position, he was the means of liberating all the slaves, 
amounting to nearly 250,000, in the colonies; and for 
that great act of humanity and justice he is called the 
Wilberforce of France. He is a man of the highest 
honour, as well as of great talent. I have known 
him intimately for nearly eighteen years, and have 
pleasure in saying that I never knew a more honourable 
man in the whole course of my life. With his views on 
religious subjects it is right I should say I have no 
sympathy whatever, neither do I share his extreme 
sentiments on political questions. Sir George Sinclair 
entertained the same high opinion of M. Schoelcher as 
I do, but differed even more from him on political 
subjects ; for Sir George, as I have before mentioned, 
was a strenuous supporter of the elder branch of the 
Bourbons, while M. Schoelcher, as just stated, is one of the 
most ultra of the Republicans. The following corre¬ 
spondence between Sir George and M. Schoelcher will 
show whereon they differed as to the best form of 
Government, and at the same time in what a friendly 
spirit they wrote. 

The first letter is from M. Schoelcher to Sir George, in 
acknowledging the receipt of a letter and a literary com¬ 
munication Rom the latter. 


/ 

418 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

15, Montpelier Row, Twickenham, 

10th June, 1801. 

My dear and Honourable Friend, 

Thanks for having sent me your adaptation of Medea , which 
proves how perfect is your knowledge of the French language. 
I am surprised how any one could render himself so completely 
master of the art of writing as you write, unless by a continuous 
residence in France. 

“ Men never forgive those they have betrayed ” 

is assuredly a very pretty line, and expresses a true thought in 
concise terms, yet I do not see its just application to the 
younger branch of the Bourbons. MM. d’Orleans have never 
betrayed Monsieur Chambord; it must, however, be admitted 
that their father betrayed M. Charles X., by taking his place. 
He held, perhaps, the opinion that France was the property of 
M. Charles X. Those, however, who believe that France belongs 
to herself, consider that Louis Philippe betrayed his country 
only, in accepting the crown in the name of liberal principles, 
when he was just as retrograde as his predecessor, &c., &c., &c. 

In several other letters M. Schcelcher develops liis 
views of the French political situation from an exalted 
Republican stand-point. He thus writes to Sir George 
(under date Sept. 8, 1861) upon the protest of the latter 
against his irreconcilable hostility to all monarchy and to 
all dynasties. 

How, my esteemed friend, can you suppose that your propo¬ 
sitions should be capable of altering my sentiments towards 
you ? It seems to me extravagant, I allow, but it springs from 
an amiable error, which I can but respect for its origin. Yes, 
without doubt, we should unite all our efforts against those 
wicked wretches ( scelevats ), who are more than the mere tyrants 
of France—who degrade it. I regret continually that there 
are statesmen in Europe who do not comprehend that the 
honour of civilisation is involved, in whatever sense they give 
their support. But in supposing “ the approachment of the old 
parties for this end, you forget that honour itself is opposed 


LETTER FROM M. VICTOR SCHCELCHER. 


419 


to such a fusion. “Parties” in France are irreconcilable ad¬ 
versaries. So far from our allying ourselves with the Carlists or 
the Orleanists, their dignity would not permit them to coalesce 
with us. They have thought fit to make common cause with 
the Bonapartists, and overthrow us; but they will pay dearly 
for this baseness. No, we are of another stamp; we cannot 
follow their lead. Among us Republicans there are gradations 
{nuances ),—where are there not? If we could efface these for 
a moment it would serve the holy cause of good—for we all wish 
for right, justice, truth and liberty, although we do not seek 
them in the same way. But we are invincibly separated from 
monarchists, because at least one of these great blessings is, we 
believe, not sought by them, namely—liberty. Frenchmen are 
too logical to be capable of using their opinions one against 
another. What you call constitutional monarchy is impossible 
in France, because it is in itself an illogical thing {chose illo- 
gique). Hence the attempts of constitutional kings have 
always tended to absolutism, that being the essential principle 
of monarchy. It was to carry out their principle that Louis 
XVI., Charles X., and Louis Philippe fell one after the other; 
and it is for this that Monsieur Bonaparte will fall also, in¬ 
dependently of the disgust which he excites, for France is Demo¬ 
cratic, and tends always to the realisation of her principles. 

You English, living under a legal fiction, may believe in 
Monarchy, because you have a king or a queen, but, in reality, 
your government is an oligarchy; your king or your queen being 
nothing by themselves, having less power than the President of 
the United States, and your House of Commons, where nobody 
is admitted unless he is rich, is merely a Chapel of Ease 
{succursale) to the House of Lords. Is not its majority 
actually composed of the sons, or the sons-in-law, or the 
brothers of lords ? The English people have truly very 
little part in their elections ; they are not represented ; 
and, what is more, they do not aspire to be so. As to the 
liberty you enjoy, I am by no means tempted to deny that 
it is not so extended as is desirable; no one admires it more 
than myself; and as to your executive government, I will render 
it this justice, that it has the wisdom to understand that it is 
legality that assures you tranquillity. Nevertheless, it must be 


) 


420 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

confessed that this is merely tolerance. It holds that no question 
divides you, and above all, that your queen is a good citizen, 
who occupies herself with marrying her numerous progeny, and 
has no inclination to trouble her head with politics. But your 
arsenal of laws against all liberties is as formidable as that of 
the most despotic of countries. What have you not paid in 
damages against the press, down to the reign of your last king ? 
to say nothing of newspaper editors who were hanged under 
the three Georges; and liow many more would you have had 
if you had had a king with a will of his own ? I have seen 
within three years, without any more ceremony than the De- 
cembrisers use in France, the publisher Duclose cast into prison, 
not because he was the author, but merely because he was 
the vendor of a pamphlet which displeased Mr. Palmerston, 
the accomplice of the Pecembrisers. With you these half¬ 
measures, this swimming between two waters, would fail to 
satisfy anybody, neither the people nor the Government. It is 
a necessity then that democracy should kill aristocrac}^, or that 
aristocracy should kill democracy. Their struggle has been 
long and cruel: it broke out in 1789, and it may last, perhaps, 
a long time yet to our sorrow, but one or other must triumph. 
They can never live beside each other by any compromise. 
Why is France crushed by despotism at this moment \ Because 
it could not content itself with liberty, with tolerance; because 
it hankered after monarchy. If it accepted the Empire it would 
not be compelled to keep it constantly with the bayonet at its 
throat. After that, my dear excellent friend, you speak to me 
about “ meeting mid-way ” the Berryers, the Guizots, and the 
Montalemberts ! !! . . . . 

In other letters M. Schoelcher pursues the same 
uncompromising Kepublican style, condemning Count 
Cavour, Victor Emmanuel, and even Garibaldi, with 
rigorous impartiality, as being imperfect or short-coming 
friends of liberty,—a crime which knows no pardon with 
M. Schoelcher. 

I ought to have observed in the outset that, in speaking 




LETTER FROM SIR G. SINCLAIR TO M. VICTOR SCHCELCHER. 421 

or writing in Lis letters of kings, princes, and otLer 
persons of liigli titles, lie never calls them by their titles. 
The Due d’Orleans, for example, is called plain Monsieur 
Orleans, and the Count de Chambord, Monsieur Chambord. 
When speaking English, his plan of denying royal or 
nob]e titles to anyone, sounded still more oddly. Sir 
George and I used to enjoy his calling the Emperor of 
the French, Mr. Bonaparte, and the Empress, Mrs. Bona¬ 
parte. The Duke of Wellington never received from M. 
Schoelcher any other prefix to his name than simply Mr. 
Wellington, and Lord Derby than plain Mr. Derby. 

As a pendant to M. Schoelchers fervent Republicanism 
and avowed and irreconcilable hostility to kings and 
dynasties in all their varied forms, the following copy of a 
letter from Sir George to his French Republican friend 
will show Sir George’s answer to the above. 

Thurso Castle, 7th Sept. 1861. 

Dear and esteemed Friend, 

I trust it is superfluous for me to reiterate the assurance of the 
sentiments of deep attachment and profound respect with which 
your disinterestedness, your probity, and your talents have in¬ 
spired me. I take the present opportunity of naming it because 
it may serve as a motive and excuse for the liberty I am about to 
take in venturing to address to you some reflections on the 
present and the future of a country, the interests of which are 
so dear to you, and for the liberty of which you have not hesi¬ 
tated nobly to make the greatest sacrifices. You cannot detest 
more heartily than myself the atrocious and perfidious govern¬ 
ment which at once inflicts on her disgrace and misery, and of 
w hich we mutually wish the fall and destruction. But we by 
no means are agreed as to the state of things which we would 
desire to see substituted; and, as regards myself, I am perfectly 
persuaded that the overthrow of the Corsican dynasty is abso¬ 
lutely impossible while “ les anciens partis” regard each other 
with reciprocated jealousy ; while they cannot resolve to bury 


) 


4 22 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

their past differences in oblivion, and to act together with zeal 
and cordiality in the attainment of their common object. I 
know perfectly well how strongly you prefer Republican insti¬ 
tutions, but you yourself have often admitted, that the most 
honoured and respected partizans of this principle (Republican) 
cherish among themselves almost irreconcilable differences. 
For example, that you and M. Ledru Rollin, and M. Louis 
Blanc but seldom meet, and that you are very far from enter¬ 
taining the same ideas on the constitution which should be 
adopted. I have always admired your candour and uprightness, 
and I therefore venture to ask you if your predilection in 
favour of a republic has not been shaken by the unhappy scenes 
of carnage, brutality, insubordination, disorder, and outrage 
which have recently been realised in the United States of 
America? Would you not prefer a constitutional monarchy, 
founded upon a basis of parliamentary liberty ? Would you 
refuse to listen to the voice of the head of the ancient house 
who should call for the aid of your enlightenment and of your 
honesty? Have you not sufficient grandeur of soul to meet 
midway the Berryers, the Guizots, the Montalemberts, and to 
associate yourself with those and all the patriots of France of 
every rank and of every class, and of every shade of opinion, 
who are warmed with the same virtuous and honourable desire 
to break the ignominious and heavy yoke under which your 
country groans ? 

I know how much I risk in venturing to write this ; be it so, 

I will submit to the heaviest punishment—I mean the loss of a 
friendship to which I attach so high a value. My mind advises 
me to silence, but my heart forces me to speak ; and it is to 
yours I address this appeal, which is dictated by the most sincere 
inward convictions. 

Yours, now and for ever, 

Geo. Sinclair. 

With four letters to Sir George Sinclair from Mr. Car¬ 
lyle, and one from Mrs. Carlyle, I shall conclude this 
chapter. The first relates to an invitation which Mr. ' 
Carlyle had received to visit Thurso Castle, and remain 


LETTER FROM MR. CARLYLE. 


423 


as long as lie could in that hospitable mansion. The 
letters have all the characteristics of Mr. Carlyle’s usual 
epistolary style, which, in the qualities of raciness of 
sentiment and peculiarity of expression, are unique in 
modern correspondence, and, I believe, in ancient, too. 
Addressing Sir George, Mr. Carlyle says, under date— 


Dear Sir, 


Chelsea, 24th July, 1860. 


There is something so truly hosjfitable in the tone of your 
letter, something so human-looking and salutary in the adven¬ 
ture proposed me, that I decide on attempting it; and mean ac¬ 
tually to embark in the Aberdeen steamer, on Wednesday 
August 1 (that is to-morrow week), sea voyaging being much 
more supportable at all times than the horrors of railwaying, 
vainly attempting sleep in inns, &c., &c.; and shall hope to be 
at Wick, and thence under your roof, at some time on the Sa¬ 
turday following, if all prosper. There ! 

Most likely I shall write again before sailing; in the meantime 
I have only to bid you thank the beneficent Lady in my name, 
and say that I have good hope her angelic intentions will suc¬ 
ceed upon me in some measure, and thus it will be a welcome 
help indeed. That, for the rest, my domestic habits are all for 
simplicity and composure (simplex munditiis the motto in all 
things), that I live, with clear preference where possible, on 
rustic farm-produce,—“ milk and meal,” eggs, chickens, moor- 
mutton; white fish (salmon, veal, lamb, three things tabooed to 
me); reckon an innocent bread-pudding the very acme of culi¬ 
nary art; am accustomed to say, “Can all the Udes in Nature, 
with all the kings’ treasuries to back them, make anything so 
good as good cream ? ”—and likewise that “ the Cow is the friend 
of man, and the French Cook his enemy,”—and not one day 
in ten drink beyond a single glass of wine. Sufficient on that 
head. For company I want none but yours and hers :—The 
great song of the everlasting sea, and the silences of earth and 
sky, will be better “ conversation ” to me than the kind I have 
long had! 

On the whole I am quite gay with the hope of becoming 


424 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

a “Konig in Thule (though without the misfortunes and 
bibacities of that old gentleman). There, in my Schloss am 
Meev, for a while, I promise to become a much more human 
animal, were sleep restored to me, in that grand lullaby, and 
the rough hair smoothed down again a little. Adieu, in the 
hope of soon meeting, 

Yours sincerely, 

T. Carlyle. 


Another letter relative to Mr. Carlyle’s visit to Thurso 
Castle follows close on the heels of the one I have just 
given. It is dated July 31, exactly a week after the 
preceding. 


Chelsea, 31st July, 1860. 


Dear Sir, 

Your note has come this morning ; thanks once more. I write 
a line, as at any rate I intended, merely to say that the purpose 
holds; that I am booked for the Aberdeen steamer, Wednesday 
1 p.m.; thence to Wick by the old program; and that I hope 
to cut across, if all prosper, and find you at Thurso Castle 
some time on Saturday,—and there to lie down and sleep for I 
know not how long! If sleep do not come, you will have to 
shove me on to Inverness, into the current of railways; and I 
must go further again, were it only to fare worse. A brother 
of mine now here, Dr. Carlyle, physician once in Rome, &c., but 
in late years, especially in late months, a wandering man,—will 
escort me to Aberdeen, perhaps to Wick; intending to “ see the 
Orkneys, the Shetlands,” or I know not what. My Wife cannot 
get away at present, nor for a week or two coming. 

She is naturally much gratified by your repeated invitation ; 
and has often spoken of Thurso since it was first heard of here: 
but she cannot sail at all; and apart from her domestic enter¬ 
prises here, which induce the desire rather of my absence for a 
couple of weeks, she shudders somewhat at the long 600 miles 
of land-journey, even cut into sections; and dare not even un¬ 
dertake for Edinburgh till I have reported of myself from the 
Far North. 

You need not reckon me quite an invalid, after all. My sleep¬ 
ing faculty has returned, or is evidently returning, to the old 


LETTER FROM MRS. CARLYLE. 


425 


imperfect degree : but my work, but my bead—In short, I was 
seldom in my life more worn out to litter weariness; or had more 
need of lying down for a little rest, under hopeful conditions. In 
haste (as usual), 

Yours sincerely always, 

T. Carlyle. 

The subjoined letter from Mrs. Carlyle to Sir George 
Sinclair is not dated, so far as regards the year; but 
it evidently follows close on the foregoing. It is felici¬ 
tously playful in reference to her husband :— 

5, Cheyne Row, Chelsea. 

August. 

My dear Sir, 

D ecidedly you are more thoughtful for me than the man who 
is bound by vow to “ love and cherish me : ” not a line have I 
received from him to announce his safe arrival in your do¬ 
minions. 

The more shameful on his part, that, as it appears by your 
note, he had such good accounts to give of himself, and was per¬ 
fectly up to giving them. 

Well! now that you have relieved me from all anxiety about 
the effects of the journey on him, he may write at his own “rea¬ 
sonably good leisure.” Only I told him I should not write till I 
had heard of his arrival from himself; and he knows whether 
or no I am in the habit of keeping my word—to the letter. 

A thousand thanks for the primrose roots; which I shall plant, 
so soon as it fairs ! To-day we have again a deluge ; adding a 
deeper shade of horror to certain household operations going on 
under my inspection (by way of “ improving the occasion of his 
absence!”). One bedroom has got all the feathers of its bed and 
pillows airing themselves out on the floor ! creating an atmo¬ 
sphere of down in the house, more choking than even “cotton- 
fuzz.” In another, upholsterers and painters are plashing away 
for their life; and a couple of bricklayers are tearing up flags 
in the kitchen to seek “the solution” of a non-acting drain! 
All this on the one hand; and on the other, visits from my doctor 
resulting in ever new “composing draughts,” and strict charges 


426 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

to “ keep my mind perfectly tranquil.” You will admit that one 
could easily conceive situations more ideal. 

Pray do keep him as long as you like ! To hear of him “ in 
high spirits ” and “ looking remarkably well ” is more composing 
for me than any amount of a composing draughts,” or of “insist- 
ance on the benefits of keeping myself perfectly tranquil.” It is 
so very different a state of things with him from that in which 
I have seen him for a long time back ! 

Oh! I must not forget to give you the “kind remembrances ” 
of a very charming woman, whom any man may be pleased to 
be remembered by, as kindly as she evidently remembered you ! 
I speak of Lady William Russell. She knew you in Germany, 
“ a young student,” she told me, when she was Bessy Rawdon. 
She “had a great affection for you, and had often thought of 
you since.” You were “very romantic in those days; oh, very 
romantic and sentimental,” she could assure me ! Pray send 
me back a pretty message for her; she will like so much to know 
that she has not remembered you “ with the reciprocity all on 
one side.” 

I don’t even send my regards to Mr. C., but— 

Affectionately yours, 

Jane W. Carlyle. 

After remaining at Thurso Castle on a visit of five 
weeks' duration, Mr. Carlyle returned, and, on reaching 
the place mentioned in his letter, lie wrote to Sir George, 
announcing his safe arrival. The announcement is made, 
and, indeed, the whole letter is written, in a manner 
which no one could imitate. 

Scotsbrig, Ecclefechan, 13th Sept. I860. 

Dear Sir George, 

I arrived here, at my half-way house, the night before last; 
without accident to speak of, indeed, with what may be called 
“ a pleasant voyage,” both by sea and land, if any such could now 
be pleasant: nevertheless I feel considerably smashed; and, for 
the present, at least twenty per cent, below what you and Thurso 
Castle delivered me at, that morning, in Scrabster Roads. Alas, 


LETTERS FROM MR. CARLYLE. 


427 


one has to voyage; and there is no wishing-carpet or Fortunatus’s 
hat to do it with, in these modern steam-days! 

At Linlathen there fell out of my portmanteau two hooks,— 
a chamber Bible, and a volume of Heinrich, which the excellent 
Fraser (out of whose reach I should have laid them, but did not) 
had packed in by mistake ! After consideration, I left them at 
“ Corona ” to the care of Mr. Stephen junior ; charging him to be 
so kind as to send them over at once to Mrs. Power; by whom 
they were to be delivered to your Edinburgh bookseller,—and by 
him, as I hope, reconsigned shortly to their real place of owner¬ 
ship. Please mention that they do arrive uninjured, when and 
if they do. Chelsea will be the address ; in a few days I am to 
start off thither again, there to get upon the treadwheel again, 
—sinner that I am ! 

Mr. Erskine was well, and all about him looking very happy. 
We had plenty of pious discourse for the two days I stayed; he 
sent many compliments to “ the good Sir George ; ” and I did 
not forget the tradition of the turbot we once heard of. 

Adieu, dear Sir, and thousand thanks for all your unwearied 
kindnesses and human hospitalities to me, which were perfect 
as one seldom finds them in this world. To Miss Sinclair my 
lasting remembrances and regards. 

Yours ever truly, 

T. Carlyle. 

The next and last letter from Mr. Carlyle to Sir George 
Sinclair which I will quote from the letters lying before 
me, is dated April 15tli, 1863, immediately after the 
death of Lady Camilla Sinclair, and is chiefly a letter of 
condolence with Sir George on the heavy bereavement 
he had sustained in the loss of one he so much loved. 
The following is the letter, which is full of fine and 
friendly feelings:— 

Chelsea, loth April, 1863. 

Dear Sir, 

We read in the newspapers, with a lively sympathy, the 
announcement of what had come upon you. It is a heavy blow 
and a very sorrowful: the parting with a loved soul, who has 
been your companion so long through good and evil; who was 



428 


MEMOIRS OE SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


such a bright being when you first found her,—and has had to 
fade away under many sufferings and sorrows, which you have 
shared with her, and leave you alone for the remainder of the 
pilgrimage. “It is the way of all the earth ;” yes, and has been 
since man was first made. And yet there is a strange originality 
in it to every one of us, when it comes upon him in its course. I 
grieve to think how sad you are. I myself remember the good 
Lady and her very great goodness to me while herself so heavy- 
laden ; and the thought that I shall never see her again is 
painful and pathetic to me. Words are very idle, so are wishes : 
I will say no more on the subject. Time, by degrees, smooths 
away the first asperities ; then Death has a kind of bland aspect, 
most sad, but also most sacred : the one haven appointed for 
us all. 

I am still kept overwhelmingly busy here ; my strength slowly 
diminishing, my work progressing still more slowly,—my heart 
really almost broken. In some six or eight months,—surely 
not longer than eight,—I hope to have at last done : it will be 
the gladdest day I have seen for ten years back, pretty much 
the one glad day! I have still half a volume to do ; still a 
furious struggle, and tour-de-force, as there have been many, 
to wind matters up reasonably in half a volume. But this is 
the last, if I can but do it; and if health hold out in ai^ fair 
measure, I always hope I can. 

Your Pamphlet on Napoleon has never come. I am happy to 
agree entirely in what you say about that renowned Corsican 
gentleman (“ Play-actor Pirate,” who after all found dishonesty 
not the best policy), and about his Sham Synonym of these 
present times, whom I still more heartily dissent from, and even 
take the liberty of despising. Probably nothing can be written 
upon them that will do much good. There is such an out¬ 
pouring of disloyal platitudes, and vocal jackassery, of every 
figure, in these times, as quite disgusts one with the pen, and 
almost with the tongue itself. 

Farewell, dear sir; may your pious heart soon compose itself, 
and be able to say,—what Wisdom has, in all dialects, prescribed 
since Wisdom first was,—■“ Good is the will of the Lord.” 

Yours ever truly, 

T. Carlyle. 


OTHER LETTERS TO SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 


429 


I cordially endorse every word which Mr. Carlyle here 
says in reference to the virtues of Lady Camilla Sinclair. 
She was held in the highest regard by all that ever had 
the good fortune to be acquainted with her. For nine or 
ten years before her death Lady Camilla was subject 
occasionally to very severe attacks of illness, which usually 
confined her to her bed, in a state of great physical pros¬ 
tration, for ten or twelve days. Yet so great was her 
energy, and so cheerful her mind, that the very moment 
she recovered she displayed her wonted buoyancy of 
spirits, just as if nothing had happened. As an instance 
of Lady Camilla’s energy of character, I may mention, 
that, when I was on a visit to Thurso Castle, some time 
before her death, and after a severe and prolonged attack 
of illness, she proposed, the first day after she had been 
able to leave her room, that she and Miss Sinclair and 
myself should pay a few days’ visit to the Orkney 
Islands,—usually a very rough voyage, and having to 
encounter great inconveniences after landing. She 
was, however, dissuaded from undertaking the expe¬ 
dition, because of hindrances which did not occur to 
her when she proposed it. Her rallying powers were 
unusually great after illness in any form ; and those 
who saw how cheerful she was the moment she was able 
to leave her room could scarcely believe that she had 
been ill at all. 

Numerous as are the letters which I have given, ad¬ 
dressed to Sir George Sinclair, I have only transferred to 
this volume comparatively few out of the large collec¬ 
tion sent me, from which to make my selection. Between 
the Rev. Dr. Guthrie and Sir George a warm and con¬ 
tinuous friendship subsisted for more than a quarter of a 


430 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


century: and some scores of the letters from the former 
to the latter are found in the series of volumes now lying 
before me. They are essentially letters of the most fer¬ 
vent friendship. They are marked throughout by that fine, 
open, genial nature for which Dr. Guthrie stands pre¬ 
eminent among the men of the day. Among others of 
Sir George’s copious correspondents was Sir Brook 
Boothby, a well known baronet in the earlier part of Sir 
George’s parliamentary life. His letters are so volu¬ 
minous that they would, if published, make a moderately 
sized volume. Then there is a M. de Glosson, who be¬ 
longed to a family of the ancienne noblesse. He writes, 
in French, a very large number of interesting and very 
able letters to Sir George, but they chiefly relate to topics 
which would not only be uninteresting, but not even intel¬ 
ligible, as regards many of their allusions, at the present 
day. The Rev. John Hamilton Gray, of Bolsover Castle, 
near Derby, who lias two livings in that part of the 
country, was another friend of Sir George, and for more 
than forty years one of his voluminous correspondents. 
A very large number of the reverend gentleman’s * 
letters, all written with much ability, and some of them 
displaying great and varied learning, with enlightened 
views of the great questions of the day, have been care¬ 
fully preserved by Sir George. 

I ought to mention, that so very great was Mr. Gray’s 
friendship for Sir George, that for many years past he 
always commenced his letters, “My dearest Friend.” 
In a letter addressed to Sir George expressing his regret 
that, owing to the unexpected illness of his only daughter, 
he had been obliged to relinquish an engagement he had 
made to visit Thurso Castle, agreeably to an invitation 


LETTER FROM THE REY. MR. GRAY. 


431 


received from Sir George, Mr. Gray writes, in the begin¬ 
ning, as follows :— 

Bolsover Castle, September 19. 

It has, indeed, been a very severe mortification to me that 
Maria has been obliged to abandon the visit to you, which I 
regarded with so much pleasure for her, and with so much 
satisfaction for myself,—as, next to being in your society, my 
wish is that those nearest and dearest to me should share in 
that affectionate intercourse which has been my privilege and 
happiness during the last six-and-thirty years. During the 
whole of that time, I do not remember one cloud having 
traversed the course of our friendship, and this is what cannot 
often be said after so long a lapse of years. 

This is a remarkable thing to be able to say. How 
very few friendships one hears of in this world, so very 
strong and so prolonged, without the slightest break, 
as that between Sir George Sinclair and the Rev. Mr. 
Gray. 



1 



CHAPTER XVII. 

Literary Labours of Sir George Sinclair—Travels in Germany in Two Volumes 
—Various Works on Political and Religious Subjects—Writings for the 
Newspaper Press—Letters to the Protestants of Scotland—Poetry. 

Probably no man of his day was a more voluminous 
writer for the press than Sir George Sinclair. His earliest 
work consisted of two volumes, and was devoted to a 
detail of the two visits he had paid to Germany, and 
other parts of Europe. His first visit was when he 
went thither to complete his education, and the second 
when on his marriage tour. During his sojourn on the 
Continent, Sir George, then Mr. Sinclair, regularly wrote 
home letters to his father and to friends of the family, 
narrating the incidents he deemed most calculated to in¬ 
terest and instruct. And the letters in question were so 
much admired by those to whom they were addressed, 
that they urged him to publish them in a book. He 
objected to their publication in the usual manner in 
which letters interesting to friends are brought before the 
public as books ; but he agreed to comply so far with the 
wishes of his friends, as to have the letters printed for pri¬ 
vate circulation. This was accordingly done, and I have 
now before me the work in question, entitled “ Travels 
in Germany,” with a reading of which I have been 
favoured by Sir George’s brother, the Venerable Arch¬ 
deacon of Middlesex, who is the possessor of the only 


WRITINGS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. 


433 


copy with which I am acquainted. The chief character¬ 
istics of the work in question are the intimate acquaint¬ 
ance with the fine arts, which is proved to have been 
possessed by the author, and his knowledge of what was 
going on, at the time he wrote his book, at the prin¬ 
cipal Continental courts. In these respects this work of 
Sir George, the first and largest he ever wrote, is one 
which possesses great interest. Very many of those who 
read it regretted at the time that the book was printed 
for private circulation only, and not published in the 
usual form, and under the usual circumstances. He 
resisted all entreaties made to him with that view, not¬ 
withstanding the fact of his being fully aware how much 
the work was admired by the most competent judges. 

Though Sir George Sinclair was one of the mildest 
men I ever knew, either as regards his disposition or his 
mode of expressing himself, his detestation of Louis 
Napoleon acquired an intensity I have never seen ex¬ 
ceeded in the dislike of any other person to any other 
man. His inveterate hostility to the Emperor of the 
French led him to employ a strength of language in 
speaking of the Occupant of the Tuileries, which he 
never did in speaking of any one else. One of his 
favourite epithets was, “ The Man of December/' In one 
of his pamphlets, entitled “ Deflections on the Anniversary 
of a Coup d’Etat” after referring to the case of a sharper 
who had made a large fortune by cheating at play, but 
was eventually detected by a party who had long been one 
of his victims, and who stuck a fork through the sharpers 
hand so as to fix it to the table, when the card was found 
beneath it, Sir George goes on to say : 

On the same principle, one of Bonaparte’s martyrs might say, 


434 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

“ If you did not pretend to have abjured Imperial Machia- 
velianism, and adopted Republican principles in order to obtain 
the Presidential chair ; if you did not endeavour, up to the 1st 
of December, 1851, to lull the friends of freedom into a fatal 
security by persevering in this system of hypocrisy; if you did 
not, on the day following, incur the guilt of perjury and murder 
by subverting, through the foul medium of armed and drunken 
bandits, the Government which you had sworn to protect and 
perpetuate; if you did not obtain the Imperial dignity by the 
most bare-faced fraud and violence ; if you have not driven into 
exile or doomed to insignificance all the men most distinguished 
as statesmen, patriots, heroes, or philosophers; if you are not at 
this moment the object of dread, execration, or contempt, to all 
who respect the rights of liberty, justice, aiid humanity,—if 
these charges are false, then I am a consummate slanderer; but 
if they are true, why you are a consummate scoundrel, and 
every public man a consummate sycophant who extenuates or 
eulogises your iniquities.” 

Here is another specimen of the manner in which Sir 
George Sinclair expressed himself from time to time in 
relation to Louis Napoleon. 

As Louis XIV exclaimed when the Spanish monarchy became 
the patrimony of his grandson, “Desormais il n’y a plus de 
Pyrenees,” so Louis Napoleon is considered by all—or, at all 
events, by most—of the great and grave statesmen, as having 
cordially proclaimed, from the moment at which his successful 
treason was accomplished, that henceforth the channel which 
divided the two peoples has been virtually dried up. Such 
seems to be the conviction cherished at Windsor and at West¬ 
minster, and in virtue thereof there could be no more fitting 

o 

occasion for causing the Park and Tower guns to be fired, the 
bells of the Metropolis to ring a merry peal, official or ex-official 
entertainments to be given by all the principal ministers and 
ex-ministers of the Crown, at which, in compliment to their 
august confederate and companion, they might for once think 
proper to substitute for the Windsor uniforms the uncouth and 
eccentric masquerade of tragedy and tasteless vulgarity, which 



SIR GEORGE’S VIEWS OF THE SEPOY REBELLION. 435 


was worn by command at Compffigne, in the palace of the 
Imperial Amphictyon, who bags with his own gun on such 
occasions perhaps as many heads of game as there were heads 
of families butchered by the muskets of his ruthless soldiery at 
the great civic cliasse of 1851. 

Sir George Sinclair took a deep interest in the events 
connected with the Sepoy rebellion. He regarded the 
conduct of our Government in reference to the mode in 
which that rebellion was put down as disgraceful to 
humanity, and as an outrage on the Christianity which 
this country professes to be its religion. He wrote at the 
time in terms the strongest which could be employed in 
denunciation of the barbarities practised towards the 
Sepoys, as these were published in the journals of the 
day, and brought out in Parliament by Mr. Charles 
Gilpin, the member for Northampton. The barbarities 
which were committed by the English towards the muti¬ 
neers who fell into our hands in that rebellion, were 
regarded by Sir George as sufficiently great to make us 
ashamed of being Englishmen. Sir George transfers to 
one of his pamphlets, published in the form of a “ Letter 
to M. Berryer, the First Orator of Modern Times/’ copious 
proofs of the shocking inhumanity of our countrymen 
in the Sepoy mutiny. Mr. Charles Gilpin, and several 
other members of the House of Commons, expressed 
themselves as strongly in condemnation of our conduct 
on that occasion, as the rules of the House would 
permit, but no language to which utterance was then 
given approached in burning indignation that which Sir 
George Sinclair employed in the pamphlet to which I 
allude. Let me lay before my readers one specimen.. 
In one place, after alluding to the tyranny of Louis 

F F 2 


436 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Napoleon and the massacre of Paris at the time of the 
Coup d’Etat , Sir George says : 

Judging from analogy, we should, I think, be warranted in 
concluding if that monster Nana Sahib’s coup d'etat had suc¬ 
ceeded, and he had grasped with blood-stained hands the sceptre 
of sovereignty at Lucknow or Benares, that Lord Canning, Lord 
Elphinstone, Lord Clyde, Sir John Lawrence, and Sir James 
Outram, would have eagerly coveted the distinction of being 
invited to partake of his splendid and sumptuous entertain¬ 
ments—and why not ? In some respects, no doubt, the massacre 
of Cawnpore was even more cruel and more criminal than the 
massacre of Paris. But Nana Sahib’s victims possessed no 
special claim on his favour or on his friendship. He had not 
been spontaneously selected by them as the accredited protector 
of their persons or of their properties. They belonged to a 
nation which he was entitled to regard with the strongest 
feelings of hatred and hostility as the enemies of the rights and 
the religion of his country. His crime excited an universal 
outcry of just execration, but when weighed in the balance of 
dispassionate and discriminating impartiality, it is palliated by 
some considerations of which the absence aggravates tenfold the 
enormity of that flagrant and perfidious act, in spite, or rather, 
in consequence, of which its perpetrator has been fostered and 
flattered by the Peers, and Princes, and potentates of a depraved 
and infatuated world. 

Sir George Sinclair having denounced the inhumanities 
perpetrated in India during the Sepoy rebellion in that 
country, hurls his invectives at the heads of our leading 
Cabinet Ministers, because of their sycophancy to Louis 
Napoleon. He says : 

But whatever may be the extent of our own departures from 
the principles of justice and humanity, it is to me at least a 
source of humiliation and regret that our Palmerstons and 
Clarendons, our Malmesburys and Disraelis, seem to plume 
themselves upon the high privilege of being numbered amongst 


SERVILITY TO LOUIS NAPOLEON. 


437 


tlie guests whom a despot delights to honour, and invites to his 
banquet of wine. And, when British statesmen, or senators, or 
generals, or judges, or the “ heads ” of all the different parties 
(for each party is a many-lieaded monster, a bellua multorum 
capitum), are condescendingly summoned to these ceremonious 
and sumptuous feasts, the Imperial host may rest assured that, 
on the part of all his guests, from the least to the greatest, he 
shall have “ worship ” in the presence of them that sit at meat 
with him. Even in the case of such unworthy descendants of 
illustrious French families as have passed beneath the Caudine 
forks and submitted to this indignity, I believe that if the loyal 
and high-minded progenitor of such a degenerate scion still 
survives in honourable disgrace or voluntary exile, and that 
some pliant and plausible Philinte were to say, in an accommo¬ 
dating and apologetic strain, “ What would you have had your 
grandson do when the entire country has submitted to the 
Imperial sceptre ? ”—the virtuous and venerable Alceste would 
exclaim, with just and generous indignation, “ Qu’il mourftt,” 
rather than have basely turned his back upon the cause for 
which his unflinching and uncompromising ancestors laid down 
their lives, or sacrificed their patrimonies and their homes. 

So far, Sir, again, as our own statesmen and senators are con¬ 
cerned, I am almost surprised that their English palates were 
not scorched and scarified with the enormous quantity of 
Cayenne condiment with wdiich the Imperial delicacies are 
seasoned, and which would cause the most luxurious dishes to 
be dismissed untouched and untasted from a truly British table. 
I lately met with a parody or adaptation of an epigram of Prior, 
which, as it has in all probability never reached }^our eyes or 
ears, I shall venture to transcribe for your perusal :— 

“ Full oft does Pam with Boney dine, 

On turbot, truffles, and rich wine, 

But Boney his own feats rehearseth, 

And Pam must praise what Roebuck curseth ; 

I pity or despise the sinner, 

Who envies Pam his dear-bought dinner.” 

I am persuaded that such of our nobles as in the nineteenth 
century condescend to enrol themselves amongst the Napoleon- 
ists, would in the first have enlisted under the banners of the 


438 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

Herodians, and been comprehended amongst the guests who 
“ sat at meat” with the murderer of the Baptist. There is, 
indeed, this broad distinction. A great crime was committed 
by the one “for his oath’s sake,” and by the other in manifest 
violation of it. But every official dignitary of the present day 
seems to regulate his friendship, so far as foreign monarchs and 
ministers are concerned, according to position and not to prin¬ 
ciple ; he is elevated far above such paltry considerations, which 
are only fitted to influence the ignoble and the obscure. 

Sir George spared no class of the community, however 
high in rank, who played the parasite to him whom, as 
I have stated, he usually called the “ Man of December.” 
The Court and the Cabinet, Windsor and Westminster, 
were equally denounced by him. Probably in no part of 
his writings is anything to be met with in language 
more vigorous than were the terms in which he expressed 
his indignation at the circumstance of our Queen 
going to visit the tomb of the First Napoleon. He felt 
that that visit seriously compromised not only herself, 
but the whole country. No one can doubt who it was 
that was in Sir George Sinclair’s eye when he wrote, in 
the foliowiug ironical language: “We are not, so far 
as I know, in possession of any historical evidence that 
the eunuch, who was First Lord of the Treasury to 
Candace, Queen of the Ethiopians, was himself hand and 
glove with Herod the king, or advised his royal mistress 
to exchange hospitalities with that powerful but unscru¬ 
pulous monarch, who was probably their contemporary, 
and apparently well prepared to have been courted and 
caressed as an august and powerful ally.” The party 
chiefly aimed at was the then Minister of Queen Vic¬ 
toria, but majesty itself was included in the censure of 
Sir George. 


IMITATIONS OF LOUIS NAPOLEON. 431) 

But it was not by invectives alone that the Emperor 
and the Government of France were held up to derision 
by Sir George. Because of the homage paid in this 
country to Louis Napoleon, he held up Imperialism 
and its English worshippers alike, to popular indignation 
and scorn by his wit and humour. His wit was some¬ 
times so refined that ordinary readers were in danger 
of mistaking things as serious which he meant only 
for a joke. His travesties of Napoleon’s sayings and 
doings were so exceedingly successful, that journalists 
to whom they were sent felt it necessary to prefix a 
few words, when inserting them, to the effect that they 
had evidently been intended for Punch , or some other 
journal of the humorist class, and had got to the journal 
in which they appeared by a mistake in their destination- 

Many of Sir George Sinclair’s imitations of Louis 
Napoleon’s letters and addresses were so admirably exe¬ 
cuted, that even Louis Napoleon himself must, at the 
first perusal, have believed they were really written by him¬ 
self. I give the following sample of this style of writing 
on the part of Sir George, not because it is by any means 
one of the best, but because its length is less than most 
of the others. Every one will remember the Orsini 
affair, some ten or twelve years ago, to which the tra¬ 
vesty relates. It is right I should mention that in this 
instance Sir George rather refers to what Louis Napoleon 
would have thought at the time, than to what he would 
have said. 

Although we have not been so fortunate as to procure a copy 
of the penitential letter written to the Emperor by Orsini, on 
the evening prior to his execution, we have been favoured with 
a transcript of his Imperial Majesty’s answer, which we lose no 


440 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


time in laying before our readers, because it redounds so much 
to the credit of the great potentate’s well-known candour and 
clemency:— 

“ Had I listened only to the dictates of my heart and con¬ 
science I should have gladly spared your life, which must, how¬ 
ever, be sacrificed in deference to the wishes, and in furtherance 
of the welfare, of my attached and loyal subjects, to whom my 
august person and illustrious dynasty are so justly and so gene¬ 
rally dear. For my own part, I cannot but acknowledge that 
success constitutes the chief distinction between the glorious 
enterprise of the 2nd of December, 1851, and the detestable 
crime of the 14th January, 1858. Had my well-contrived plot 
miscarried, I should have expiated my act, as you will yours 
to-morrow, upon the scaffold. The number of innocent French¬ 
men whose blood was shed by my accomplices was one hundred 
fold greater than the amount of your victims. I have encircled 
my brow with the diadem of despotism. You have failed in 
bursting the fetters which I have riveted in Italy, our common 
country. All the sovereigns and statesmen in Europe are my 
sycophants and slaves, and whilst they laud my achievement to 
the skies, because it prospered, have execrated your attempt 
because it failed. And yet I cannot help now and then feeling 
apprehensive that the lines written a century ago, by one of our 
greatest national dramatists, will, in the eyes of some misguided 
and prejudiced moralists, appear more appropriate on my lips 
than on yours— 

“ ‘ 0 rimorso, o rossore ! E non m’ascondo 
Misero a rai del di ! Con qual coraggio 
Soffriro gli altrui sguardi, 

Si reo di questo eccesso, 

Orribile son io tanto a me stesso ! ’— Metastasio. 

“ Napoleon.” 

It will no doubt be remembered by many of the 
readers of this volume, that some years ago, that clever 
weekly journal, The Old , published in one of its num¬ 
bers a letter, professing to be written by M. Mocquard, 
then private secretary to Louis Napoleon. The French 
was so good, and the sentiments put into his mouth so 


ASSUMED DISCUSSION FORUM NEAR THE TUILERIES. 411 

marvellously resembled those of M. Mocquard, that in¬ 
stead of seeing the letter to be a joke, he regarded the 
things said in it as real charges which he had been 
made to bring against himself, and immediately wrote to 
The Times , not only repudiating the authorship of the 
letter, but denouncing, in the most indignant terms he 
could employ, the writer who had dared to forge his name. 
I have myself been in a similar position with regard to 
contributions sent me by Sir George Sinclair for publication 
in a morning j ournal; and have frequently found it expe¬ 
dient to prefix a few observations to his articles, lest it 
might be supposed by some that I had, like M. Mocquard, 
Louis Napoleon’s private secretary, mistaken for a reality 
that which was written only in irony. For example, 
in giving insertion to the following, I deemed it neces¬ 
sary to preface it with the subjoined remarks :—“ This, 
like an article which we published the other day, is writ¬ 
ten by one of the greatest wits of the age, and must have 
been originally intended for Punch , or some of the other 
witty publications of the day; but as we have had the 
good fortune to receive it, we need not say with what 
readiness we give it insertion.” The article was written 
at a time when the papers in Paris, the servile supporters 
of the Napoleonic dynasty, were constantly declaring that 
conspiracies were forming every hour against the occupant 
of the Tuileries. The article is headed — 

DISCOVERY OF A DISCUSSION FORUM NEAR THE 

TUILERIES. 

In consequence of information derived from the wife of Rudio, 
the reprieved and respited conspirator, Sir Richard Mayne set 
off in person for Paris on Saturday morning, in order to make 
sure of surprising, before any intimation of their danger could 



•142 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


reach them, the members of a most pernicious and disgraceful 
institution, described and designated as above. As soon as lie 
arrived, Sir Richard, accompanied by four of the most active 
and experienced agents of the French police, repaired to the 
place of rendezvous, and discovered, by means of a hand-bill 
privately distributed at the den, that the meeting was actually 
in conclave, and that the question appointed for the debate 
of the evening was —“ Is it lawful and laudable for a public 
man, who has adhered to a certain creed, and been an active 
partisan of a certain cause during a long course of }^ears, to for¬ 
swear that creed, and abandon that cause, when they cease to 
be popular and prosperous, in order to promote his own interests 
and increase his own emoluments?” 

At the moment of Sir Richard’s entrance, after a most 
powerful speech from the Due de Grammont in favour of the 
proposition, the President, M. Dupin, was in the act of declaring 
that the affirmative had been carried without a single dissentient 
voice, when both these gentlemen, together with M. de Monta- 
lembert, and we grieve to add, not a few of the Emperor’s most 
honoured and confidential advisers, were arrested and sent to 
prison. The journals and papers of the society were most for¬ 
tunately discovered and secured at the time, when, to the 
astonishment and horror of Sir Richard and his auxiliaries, it 
was found that the following, amongst other equally startling 
and atrocious questions, had of late been formally discussed and 
favourably decided within the walls of this unhallowed institu¬ 
tion, with the sanction of all the princes, prelates, and digni¬ 
taries of the Empire :— 

1. Is it, or is it not, commendable to aspire after the posses¬ 
sion of the supreme authority in a State, and swear most 
solemnly to resjDect and uphold its institutions, and afterwards 
employ the power thus acquired for the purpose of effecting 
their' entire subversion ? 

2. Do perjury and massacre cease to be criminal when 
resorted to for the attainment of this object ? 

3. Is it consistent with the laws of justice and morality to 
rob the public treasury of several chests of doubloons, for the 
purpose of bribing men and officers with champagne and 
sausages to break their oaths and butcher their unsuspecting 


LOUIS NAPOLEON AND THE LATE SIR RICHARD MAYNE. 443 

fellow-citizens, and is lie to be revered as a “ remarkable” man 
of whom it can be said that— 


“ ogni deliter 

Pur che Giovi a regner, virtu gli sembra ” ?— JTetastasio. 

4. Is it conducive to tlie freedom and happiness of a great 
country that its press should be gagged, its police omnipresent 
and omnipotent, its ablest and most influential men interned, 
exiled, or consigned to obscurity, whilst its most disreputable 
and unprincipled adventurers monopolise its highest and most 
lucrative offices, both at home and abroad ? 

Sir Richard lost no time in laying before the Emperor these 
important and alarming documents. It was observed that 
during their perusal the bland and benignant smile which 
uniformly characterises his Imperial Majesty’s open and ex¬ 
pressive countenance, was clouded for a few minutes by a 
manifestation of grief and astonishment. His fascinating eyes 
were suffused with tears ; he threw himself into Sir Richard’s 
arms and exclaimed, “ Alas, alas ! my dear and respected friend, 
is it indeed come to this ? Is my throne surrounded by mis¬ 
creants who hold opinions so utterly at variance with the 
fundamental principles of civil society and so entirely de¬ 
structive of social happiness ? What will the world think of 
me when they make the astounding discovery that the most 
popular and most praiseworthy of monarchs, whom all the 
sovereigns and statesmen of Europe look upon as their model 
and their master, has reposed his confidence in men who are 
in all respects so dissimilar to himself % ” Sir Richard here 
ventured to interfere, and endeavoured to console his Majesty 
by assuring him that, so far at least as Britain is concerned, 
this discovery could not in the slightest degree affect the minds 
or alarm the consciences of the most important personages at 
the Court or in the State; that the most arrogant and sanguine 
despots are the most flattered and the most fawned upon by the 
leaders of all parties in both Houses of Parliament; and that if 
ever his Imperial Majesty should find it necessary or expedient 
to adopt the principles of which so many of his chief advisers 
and adherents had at that “ remarkable ” institution manifested 
their hearty approval, he would be loved and lauded in pro- 


444 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


portion to the rigour with which he carried them out, and that 
an overwhelming majority of the Englishmen of the present 
day were animated towards his Majesty by those sentiments of 
admiration and approval of which “ Savage ” Landor had been 
the most recent as well as the most racy expositor. 

When Sir Richard took leave, after having had the honour to 
dine at the Imperial table, his Majesty again embraced him 
with great cordiality, thanked him for the alacrity and judg¬ 
ment with which he had acted on this interesting occasion, 
invested him with the cordon of the Legion of Honour, and 
forwarded, through Sir Richard, to his congenial friend, Mr. 
Landor, the same honourable badge, in grateful recognition of 
his steady and consistent regard. 

And yet, so great was the sense of right by which Sir 
George Sinclair was actuated, that notwithstanding his 
intense hostility to Louis Napoleon, he would never say 
one single word, even to his greatest friend, nor write one 
single word, while residing in France, against the Ruler 
of that country. I spent some time with Sir George in 
the Charing Cross Hotel, the night before he started for 
Cannes, in 1867, for the benefit of his health, and he then 
said to me, “Now that I am going to reside some time 
in France, receiving the same protection from the French 
Government as any of Louis Napoleon’s subjects, it would 
be wrong in me to say or write a word against him 
while I remain in his dominions, and therefore I will 
not do it.” 

Sir George Sinclair was one of the most decided Pro¬ 
testants I have met with, and one of the ablest opponents 
of Popery. He thoroughly understood the true nature of 
the Church of Rome, and her designs, and the agencies 
through which she meant to accomplish her purposes. 
With these feelings and this knowledge on the subject, he 
naturally devoted much of his time to exposing, through 


POPISH CONVENTS AND NUNNERIES. 445 

the journals of the day, in small fly-leaves, and in large 
volumes, the theological errors of the Church of Rome, 
and the socially and politically-perilous nature of her 
teachings. One of his larger works, entitled “ Letters to 
the Protestants of Scotland/’ in which he assailed the 
Church of Rome with the keenest and most polished irony, 
a scarifying wit, and an irresistible logic, created a great 
sensation at the time—1852—it was published, and for 
years afterwards. It was the almost unanimous belief of 
the Protestants of that day that Popery had seldom had to 
encounter so formidable an opponent before, as it had to 
confront in the person of Sir George Sinclair. I could 
wish to give copious quotations from this work, but that, 
for want of the requisite space, cannot be. As, how¬ 
ever, the recent exposures in the case of Miss Saurin 
are sure to bring the subject of our English convents 
before the next Session of Parliament, I cannot resist 
giving one extract from Sir George’s book in relation to 

POPISH CONVENTS AND NUNNERIES. 

In immediate juxtaposition with the tyranny and turpitude 
with which Popery has inundated the world, by opening the 
floodgates of sacerdotal celibacy and auricular confession, it may 
be right to make some remarks on another branch of this 
accursed system, in no small degree analogous to the former, 
as well in its effects as in its origin. I allude to the establish¬ 
ment of convents and nunneries, which have so often been, 
during successive generations, the abodes of wretchedness, vice, 
and oppression. If the Reformation had procured for the 
nations which embraced it no other blessing than that of ex¬ 
emption from such unscriptural and unhallowed institutions, 
this benefit alone ought to elicit the warmest tribute of 
gratitude towards the intrepid and apostolic men who have 
made us “ free indeed ” by their suppression. There are three 


44 G 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 


devices to which the great adversary has recourse for beguiling 
unstable souls, and imposing upon them the yoke of cloistered 
sloth and sorrow. In the first jdace, there are many young 
females who, under the influence of a spurious excitement, which 
“ cometh not from above,” or when they have experienced an 
unlooked-for disappointment,—when their heart’s best feelings 
have been misplaced,—seek consolation, rest, and indemnity 
where God’s Word has not instructed to look for it. Alas ! how 
often have they found, when it was too late, that they have 
exchanged a temporary gloom, which time, and prayer, and 
sympathy, and resignation, might have dissipated or removed, 
for a life of monotony and misery, from which there is no 
escape! They had, 

“ Like the Grecian artist, woo’d 
An image they themselves had wrought.” 

They may be compared to certain ill-starred monarchs, who 
have wedded an unknown bride in consequence of having seen 
some flattering portrait, almost as different from the original as 
beauty is from ugliness, and who, when it is too late, would 
willingly give “unto the half of their kingdom,” or even the 
whole, to get rid of her. She often finds the Lady Abbess an 
injusta novercct, whose capricious imperiousness forms a sadden¬ 
ing contrast to the tender and indulgent solicitude of the heart¬ 
broken mother, whose remonstrances she has disregarded, and 
whose embraces she has repulsed. The childish cabals and 
wearisome routine of heartless ceremonies form a poor and 
paltry substitute for the endearments and fascinations of 
domestic tenderness and connubial love. 

The second series of unhappy victims are those who would 
never spontaneously have immured themselves in these priestly 
penitentiaries, but over whose minds the wily Jesuit, or all- 
powerful Confessor, has employed an ill-gotten and worse-directed 
influence, in order to persuade them to quit a world of whose 
joys they have experienced but little, and enter a cloister of 
whose sorrows they know still less. These sacerdotal anthro¬ 
pophagi are no respecters of age, rank, or sex, provided that 
money is to be obtained for the mercenary professors of 
poverty. 


LETTERS TO PROTESTANTS. 


417 


Thus it is, that in so many instances widows’ houses are 
devoured, wealthy orphans inveigled, and afterwards, as in 
the heart-rending case of the Macarthys, compelled to make 
sacrifices of duty and feeling on behalf of these insatiable horse¬ 
leeches, who act as if, in this instance as in many others, they 
had inverted the positive injunctions of Scripture, and pro¬ 
claimed that the love of money is the root of all good ! Truly, 
with them “ money is ft defence ” against the qualms of con¬ 
science. “ Money answereth all things ” which an indignant 
world can utter in reprobation of such proceedings; and when 
the heart-broken slave pours out her complaints before her 
inexorable and imperious rulers, and tells them how loath she 
is to impoverish her relatives, and do despite both to the spirit 
of grace and to the dictates of justice and affection, the answer 
is, “ What is that to us ? See thou to that.” I would ask, how¬ 
ever, whether it is possible that, when a Jesuit or a Confessor 
advises a young and artless female to become a nun, or a parent 
to enjoin or permit his child to immure herself in a convent, he 
can say, either in the one case or in the other, “ I have a message 
unto thee from God.” This is indeed a sacrifice with which the 
God of Popery may be well pleased. The mournful accents in 
which the disappointed victim bewails her virginity, and weeps 
over blasted hopes, may be music to his ears; but the God of 
the Bible would indignantly exclaim, “ Bring no more such 
vain oblations when ye come to appear before me. Who hath 
required this at your hand to tread my courts ? It is iniquity, 
even the solemn meeting.” 


This work of Sir George Sinclair, which contains 
weapons of warfare of every kind, and eminently fitted 
for the purpose for which they had been formed, lias 
been for some time out of print. It is much to be desired 
that the book should be reprinted, at a time when it is 
evident that Protestantism and Popery are on the eve of 
a more deadly conflict than they have ever been engaged 
in before. 

But in opposing Popery, whether in poetry or prose, 


448 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Sir George was extremely solicitous not to impute to it 
any feelings or principles which the Church of Rome did 
not cherish or entertain ; and being on terms of intimacy 
with some of the leading Roman Catholics of his day, he 
took care to obtain from them a verification of the justice 
of his opinions before making them public. On one oc¬ 
casion, when dining at the house of a friend, where Mr. 
O’Connell was one of the guests, a discussion occurred 
between the latter and Sir George, in relation to one of 
the principles which constitute the Popish creed. When 
Sir George pushed Mr. O’Connell hard, the latter invari¬ 
ably said, “ I repose all my doubts in the bosom of the 
infallible Church.” In this admission, the assumption 
and assertion of the infallibility of the Church of Rome 
were placed beyond all doubt. On another occasion Sir 
George Sinclair happened to dine at the house of a 
mutual friend where the late Cardinal Wiseman was one 
of the guests. The question of the exclusiveness of the 
Church of Rome chanced to become the subject of dis¬ 
cussion. The host was incredulous when Sir George 
asserted that true Roman Catholics could join in no 
act of worship with a Protestant, and that they could 
not unite in the Lord’s Prayer. The Cardinal was 
appealed to, and admitted that the Church could have 
no spiritual communion in any form or of any kind with 
a heretic. 

On another occasion Sir George met Mr. Richard Lalor 
Slieil,—thirty years ago the most popular and influential 
man in Ireland, with the single exception of Mr. O’Con¬ 
nell. The subject of conversation turned on the intoler¬ 
ance of the Roman Catholic religion. W hen referring to 
the failure of Catholic emancipation to conciliate the 



SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S POETRY. 


419 


Church of Rome, Mr. Sheil said, in a manner especially 
emphatic :—“ The greatest mistake the English have ever 
made was that of trying to conciliate the Catholics ,—as 
if we could be conciliated ” The italics are not mine. 
I give them as they were given to me. Mr. Sheil’s 
opinion is true. Popery is not to be conciliated. The 
greater the concessions made to it, the more exacting it 
becomes. 

Sir George had thus the most undoubted and greatest 
of authorities for his sentiments as to the true character 
of Popery, when explaining its nature and exposing its 
pretensions. And what Popery was in former times it is 
now, and ever will be. It is based on principles which 
admit of no change. Were it to alter in any of its es¬ 
sential features, it would cease to be Popery. 

Sir George Sinclair, as will have been inferred from 
what I have said in several of the chapters which pre¬ 
cede the present, had a great fondness for poetry. He 
was intimately acquainted with the poetical works, in 
their original, of Homer, Virgil, and the other classic 
poets of Greece and Rome, while thoroughly conversant 
with the greatest poets of France and England. But he 
not only admired superior poetry wherever he met with 
it, but was a poet himself. In speaking of Sir George as 
an author, I should mention a poem written by him about 
the year 1830, under the title of “ The Bore.” That was 
a sort of semi-satire of the follies and the fashions of the 
day. But he wrote many pieces, which unfortunately 
have not all been preserved, which were mostly of a 
domestic or local nature, and which were not only per¬ 
vaded by fine feeling, but bore upon them in every line 
the impress of having been penned by a poetic spirit. 

G G 


450 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Of this kind of poetic effusions I have a greater number 
of specimens than I can transfer to the pages of this 
volume. But it is due to the memory of Sir George that 
the world should know something of his poetic talents. 

My first specimen shall be an epitaph which he wrote 
in 1848, on the death of Dr. Maclean, a medical gentle¬ 
man practising his profession in Thurso, who was a 
young man of eminent gifts, and who was held for his 
personal virtues in the highest esteem by the entire 
population of Caithness. He died, I ought to mention, 
at the early age of twenty-eight. 

IN MEMORY OF D. G. MACLEAN, ESQ., M.D. 

By Nature gifted with a powerful mind, 

He grasped with ease its deep and buried lore, 

Tried skill, with prompt benevolence combined, 

To rich and poor each day endeared him more. 

Anxious at once to mitigate or heal 

The pains which rack the helpless or forlorn, 

No storm could quench his heart’s undaunted zeal, 

Or darkest night persuade to wait till morn. 

In lowly hut by stern disease assail’d, 

Too soon, alas, he closed his brief career ; 

Sad friends, by whom his brilliant dawn was hailed, 

Shed on its parting ray Love’s grateful tear. 

The following lines are also in Memoriam. They were 
written in memory of Constance, the youngest daughter of 
George Hope Johnstone, Esq., and of Adelaide Sinclair, 
and grand-daughter of Sir George. She was a singularly 
amiable and interesting child, and was the object of Sir 
George's warmest affections. She died on the 19th of 
May, 1868, at the age of twelve years. 

IN MEMORY OF CONSTANCE. 

Her form was cast in Nature’s choicest mould, 
f Her features beamed with tenderness and joy, 

Each circling year saw heart and mind unfold 
Graces and gifts which death can ne’er destroy. 


SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S POETRY. 


451 


The lovely star whose pure and precious dawn 

Had cheer’d and charm’d fond love’s enraptured eye, 

Too soon from Time’s dark firmament withdrawn, 

Shines in Eternity’s unclouded sky. 

In order that the beauty of these lines may be more 
fully perceived, it is right to state, that Constance, or 
Conny, as she was familiarly called, was not only a pet 
of Sir George, but was regarded by all who knew her as 
one of the most lovely children ever seen. She has been 
described to me as almost unearthly in her beauty, and 
irresistibly winning in her little ways. Sir George was so 
devotedly fond of her that her death was one of the 
severest trials in the form of family bereavements that he 
was ever called to sustain. Her death was, indeed, so 
heavy a blow to him, that he could hardly be said ever to 
have recovered from it. 

There was another grand-daughter of Sir George, 
whose name is “ Eva/’ a sister of “ Constance,” to whom 
he was much attached, and to whom, some years before 
she had entered her teens, he addressed the following 
lines, which were adapted to the minuet in Don 
Giovanni. 

TO EVA. 


i. 

Evy, since childhood’s blithesome dawn, 
Dear to thy grandsire’s inmost soul, 
Whilst tripping on the sloping lawn, 

Or shore, where tow’ring billows roll, 
On thine affection’s fostering care 
Still grateful memory loves to dwell, 
When thy sweet accents soothed despair, 
And hush’d bereavement’s awful knell. 

II. 

Whilst he on languor’s couch reclined, 
Thoughts wildly wandering far abroad, 
Wearied in body, worn in mind, 

Beneath a chastening Father’s rod, 


G G 2 


452 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


Like sympathising 1 angel, thou 
Sat’st at his feet in silence deep, 

Gazing at his grief-furrow’d brow, 

Or eyelids steep’d in fitful sleep. 

hi. 

Waking he saw thy graceful form 
Bending to aid his feeble hand, 

As friendly prop in ruthless storm 
Assists the drooping flower to stand. 

Oh ! may his wistful eyes behold, 

Ere death’s dark hour, thy features bright, 

Ilis eager arms be stretched to fold 
Thy tender limbs with fond delight. 

IV. 

When he in peaceful grave shall rest 
From bitt’rest trial’s rankling smart, 

May Heaven shield duteous Evy’s breast 
From such affliction’s barbed dart! 

If she, when youth’s glad days are o’er, 

At some lost darling’s tomb should pine, 

May Love into her chalice pour 
The balm with which she sweeten’d mine. 

Thurso Castle, Dec. 18th, 1855. 

Miss Eva Johnstone, to whom these lines were addressed 
by Sir George, has bloomed into womanhood, and is now 
the source of abounding comfort to her widowed mother. 

Probably there never was a father more devotedly 
attached to a daughter than w r as Sir George Sinclair to 
his daughter Olivia. This was known to all the friends 
of the family, and in almost every one of the letters he 
wrote to her, this fact shone forth with a noonday clear¬ 
ness. I shall presently furnish illustrations of this from 
his letters to Miss Sinclair, who ministered to him in all 
his wants, and comforted him in all his sorrows, with 
more than a filial affection, and more than an earthly 
care. His troubles were, indeed, great and manifold, 
partly caused by ill health, but chiefly by an accumula¬ 
tion of family sorrows, such as seldom fall to the lot even 
of those who have experienced most largely the truth of 


SIR GEORGE’S AFFECTION FOR IIIS DAUGHTER. 


453 


the statement,—that this world is, indeed, a valley of 
tears. 

On various occasions Sir George expressed the ardour 
of his affection for his daughter, in verse. The follow¬ 
ing is one of the poetical effusions he addressed to her, 
—every word of which proceeded from his inmost soul. 

LINES ADDRESSED TO MY DEAREST OLIVIA, IN HER 

ABSENCE. 


I. 

My hours are dreary, 

My spirit weary, 

My looks are wild, 

My brain is burning-, 

My heart is yearning 
For thee, my child. 

II. 

Hope’s dream is vanish’d, 
Life’s joy is banish’d, 

How dark the gloom ! 

My soul is fainting, 

While Fancy’s painting 
His early tomb. 

III. 

Oh, wert thou near me, 

To soothe and cheer me, 
Like mom’s soft beam, 
These eyes that languish, 

So dimm’d by anguish, 
Might faintly gleam. 

IV. 

Ships fraught with treasure 
Imparted pleasure 

To Spain’s proud kings, 
When from vast distance 
They brought assistance, 

On Zephyrs’ wings. 

v. 

Since Mercy spares thee, 
The bark that bears thee, 
My life’s stronghold, 
Contains a blessing 
More worth possessing 
Than all their gold. 


451 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


No one can read these lines without being deeply 
moved by them. I have seldom met with anything 
in which the plaintive feeling which pervades them 
could make a deeper impression on the mind of the 
reader. 

The following is Miss Sinclair’s affectionate response 
to the above beautiful expression of her father’s devoted 
attachment to her. 

REPLY TO THE FOREGOING. 

When thou art sad, 

My voice shall cheer thee ; 

When thou art sick, 

I’ll hover near thee ; 

When friends forsake, 

Heart sighs I’ll yield thee ; 

From pain and grief 

Fain would I shield thee. 

When Sorrow steals 
From life its gladness ; 

When bright Hope droops 
In heavy sadness ; 

Then shall Love’s hand 
Strew flow’rs around thee ; 

My song shall break 

Grief’s spell that bound thee. 

The following lines were written by Sir George as an 
epitaph on the Eev. Mr. Munro, Free-Church Minister of 
Halkirk, a man held in the highest esteem throughout 
the whole of Caithness. 

He sought, like Moses, Heaven’s supreme reward, 

His hopes were firmly anchor’d on a rock: 

In heart a zealous servant of his Lord, 

In life a bright example to his flock ! 

And on the death of Mr. Munro’s widow—“ the faithful 
and attached wife,”—Sir George wrote the following :— 

Tho’ dear the partner of her earthly care, 

She loved Him more whose blood redeem’d her soul: 

Husband and wife, now re-united, wear 
A deathless crown, while endless ages roll. 




455 


SUGGESTED ADDITION TO “ GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.” 

I have shown that Sir George Sinclair was a most 
strenuous opponent of Popery, and I have adverted to 
some of his various writings in which he exposed and 
denounced the errors of that ecclesiastical system. I 
will quote, as a conclusion to this chapter, some felicitous 
lines which he wrote, expressive of his views relating to 
the Religion of Rome, and which he proposed to be 
added to the National Anthem of “ God Save the Queen,” 
or to be sung separately. 

NEW ROYAL ANTHEM. 


I. 

From Rome's unhallowed leagues, 
And Jesuits’ foul intrigues, 

Guard Freedom’s land! 

Lest trait’rous foes within, 

Arm’d for the Man of Sin, 

A guilty vict’ry win, 

Be Thou at hand ! 


II. 

’Gainst Error’s subtle wiles, 
And base apostates’ smiles, 
Steel Britain’s youth ! 
May he whose flag unfurl’d 
Waves to enthral the world, 
From his fell throne be hurl’d, 
Dread Lord of Truth ! 


I will only add, that there never was a period since 
the time of the Reformation in which these lines could 
have been more appropriately sung than they may be in 
the beginning of this year, 1870. 


CHAPTER XVIII. 


Sir George Sinclair at Home—Letters to his Daughter—His Labours among 
the Poor—Dr. Turnbull—General Observations. 

Hitheeto I have chiefly spoken of Sir George Sinclair 
in his character as a public man, or as the friend and 
correspondent of many of the most distinguished men of 
the present century. It now becomes my pleasing duty 
to contemplate him in the domestic relations of life. And 
let me begin by saying that in the seclusion and sacred¬ 
ness of the family circle, he shone with a lustre which 
was in happy keeping with all that we have seen of him in 
the outer world. Regarded as a father, the fervour of his 
affection for his children, and the depth of his solicitude for 
their happiness, were never exceeded. He felt it to be his 
duty, and faithfully and delightedly did he discharge it, 
to set apart a certain time each day for special prayer on 
their behalf. When he came to be a grandfather, his 
grandchildren were included in his private prayers for 
his family at the throne of the heavenly grace. And the 
affection of his children for him was equally great. 
When the demands of duty called him to leave them, in 
order that he might fulfil his functions as a legislator of 
the land, their grief at the separation from him, has 
been described to me by one who spoke from experience 
at the time, as being greater than could be conceived by 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE TO MISS SINCLAIR. 


457 


any one who had not experienced or witnessed it. The 
warmth of the affection of his grandchildren for Sir 
George, will have been inferred from what I have said 
in a previous part of the work. 

But there was one member of his family for whom 
he cherished a very special affection,—an affection so 
sincere and so strong, that I venture to say it never 
has been surpassed in the history of parental regards. 
The poetical lines, which I have already given, addressed 
by Sir George to his daughter, will have enabled my 
readers to identify in their own minds that particular 
member of his family. She was the idol of his heart. She 
was everything to him. She was, in a word, his world. 
In order that some idea may be formed of the ardour of 
his affection for his daughter Olivia, it is right I should 
give a place to two of his letters to her, written at 
intervals of several years. The first is dated— 


Thurso Castle, 8th Dec. 1S46. 

My DEAREST, KINDEST, most AFFECTIONATE, and ENTIRELY 
beloved Child, 

How I wish that you could read what passes in my heart, 
and see how it beats with grateful emotion whenever I think or 
speak of you. I can now very seldom weep,—the fountain of 
my tears seems to be dried up ; hut I find them trickling from 
my worn and weary eyes at this moment, when I reflect that I 
shall not this day be blessed with the sight of you. It is no 
doubt natural that you should here ask, why I do not pack up 
my things and set out to-morrow morning. Oh, my Olive, my 
energy is quite extinguished, so that I am still incapable of any 
effort. I know not when or how I shall be able to set out, but 
at present the dread of the long journey prevails to a degree 
which I cannot describe, and I feel quite paralysed in spirit. 

Yesterday, I rose at half-past six, unable to sleep, and un¬ 
willing to bear my own sad thoughts; and I lighted a candle, 


458 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


and read, and played on tlie piano, to keep my mind from 
brooding over painful reminiscences. 

I pass many hours in reading, and vary my studies as much 
as possible, as I cannot dwell long on one subject. Dionysius of 
Halicarnassus, Schmidt, History of Germany, Plutarch, Sir Wil¬ 
liam Temple, Corneille, Livy, Raumer, Silius Italicus, Seneca, 
and Karamsin, all contributed yesterday (and it is the same 
routine almost every day) to while away the listless hours which 
would often “ make to themselves wings ” if you were here to 
enliven them. I often seek comfort in the reflection that, even 
had you been here, during a certain period of the day you would 
have been occupied in useful studies in the Moss-house, or 
reading “ The Portfolio ” in your own room ; but then I should 
have been anticipating the welcome moment when I should have 
been gladdened with a sight of you,—a sight to me far more 
reviving and cheering than the most glorious sunset. I dare 
not read the Ahnfrau,* because I should draw so painful a con¬ 
trast between my own present isolation and the comparative 
peace and happiness of the old Count, whose Bertha’s presence 
must have so often caused his aching heart to sing for joy. She 
could not be more to him than you are to me. 

I do not despair of rallying to such an extent as may enable 
me to leave this in January ; but if God is still pleased to leave 
the pressure of my sorrow bearing my soul down to the very 
dust, may your fond father indulge in the hope that, as soon as 
the steamer renews its voyages to Wick, you will (provided the 
vessel be either new or completely repaired) embrace the first 
opportunity to make me as happy as I am capable of being, by 
returning to me ? What a day would that be for me: how 
sleepless the previous night from impatience, and the night 
thereafter from thankfulness and joy. 

I am driven to my books, not so much by a desire of infor¬ 
mation, not by a thirst for enjoyment, but chiefly as a temporary 
anodyne for my broken spirit. You see how large a letter I 
have written with my own hand, or rather from my own heart, 
which is as full of love as of grief; and it will cheer me on 
Friday morning to think that you will be reading these desul- 

* A German Play Sir George Sinclair was in the habit of reading to his 
family. 


LETTER FROM SIR GEORGE TO MISS SINCLAIR. 45'J 

tory thoughts, these feeble attempts to convey to you some 
notion of my sorrow for your absence, and my solicitude for your 
return. I owe you a debt of gratitude which I can never 
pretend to repay, for you have been all sympathy and kindness 
to me when kindness and sympathy were most needed. Alas ! 
they are as much as ever needed now, and will continue to be 
so till these weary eyes are closed in death, and this broken 
heart has ceased to beat. Although my arm is fatigued, my 
heart never tires of pouring forth its feelings. Oh, when shall 
I again be blessed with the sight of you ? On that day—if I 
live to witness it—“ I myself will awake right early.” What a 
happiness shall I experience when we first walk on the bank 
head, or sit down in the Moss-house with Seneca or Lycurgus, 
with Racine or La Fontaine. These, these are the lessons on 
which I feast and feed. It is when I have succeeded in com¬ 
posing my mind by such soothing and cheering anticipations, 
that I beguile myself to sleep at night, or rouse myself to 
activity in the morning. I do not enjoy my present state, but 
then I find I can endure it better than any other. Whenever 
the letters arrive in the morning, I am nervous from the dread 
of something painful—whenever they are not from Rutland 
Square or the Guards’ Club. Oh ! but when I see your writing, 
I am so relieved, so sure of finding something’ to cheer and 
console me, that I generally reserve your letters, like the good 
wine at Cana, until the end. After that, I am sure of an hour 
of repose. I have very few visitors (Mr. Dalziel paid a kind 
and pleasant visit yesterday), and don’t go so often to the town, 
though I am going to do so this afternoon to look after some 
fishermen, whose families, I fear, have been much straitened by 
the late storm (for the sea is quite calm to-day). 

God bless you, my own child, my comfort, my delight, the 
stay and prop of my declining years. Kindest love to your 
mother and Addie. Best regards to Mr. Johnstone, and a kiss 
to Cecil. There are few whom I am so desirous to see, as there 
are few of whom I have heard so much. 

Ever, my dearest Olive, 

Your most affectionately attached Father, 

George Sinclair. 


4G0 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


I select tlie following letter from Sir George to Miss 
Sinclair, in preference to others, simply because it is of 
the latest date of any which are in my possession. 


Thurso Castle, July 9th, 1857. 

My ENTIRELY BELOYED AND MOST DUTIFUL CHILD, 

I am very glad that you saw, and heard, our eloquent, accom¬ 
plished, and (of course) ill-used and neglected friend, Dr. Croly. 
How true is our favourite aphorism of Mirabeau :—“ Mediocrity 
hates everything that is not mediocre .” This is the key to that 
want of appreciation of extraordinary talent and energy, which 
Courts and Cabinets have exhibited in this instance, as well 
as in others. 

I need not tell you how my heart is thirsting for your pre¬ 
sence. It grieves me, however, that you did not go to Dr. Grind- 
rod’s for at least a week, and I am mortified that you should 
have been obliged to look out for a “perch.” I think you will 
certainly reach Aberdeen in time to embark the same evening 
for Wick. If I don’t hear from you of any change of plans 
(which pray modify in any way you please), I shall write next 
week to my friend Mr. Davidson, of Strath, who, I am sure, will 
kindly meet E. and you at the pier—as he did me —and order 
a chaise to convey you to Thurso Castle, whilst you are resting 
at his hospitable house. 

Margaret [Miss Sinclair’s maid] was most gratified by your 
message, which I read to her verbatim. Mr. Mackenzie drank 
tea with me last nig]it, and was, as usual, very agreeable. I de¬ 
clined to dine with the Presbytery, not feeling at all in spirits, 
and I did not like to go a second time to the town. The wea¬ 
ther is still most ungenial. Besides additional blankets, I last 
night had a fire in my bedroom. No appearance, since my 
arrival, of the sun, the blue sky, or the Orkneys. The steamer 
sailed this morning at six from Scrabster. 

I did not hear yesterday from B8,—so, I trust, that your dear 
mother continues to make progress towards recovery. These 
attacks are most distressing; though I feel persuaded that, 
in her case, they are not attended with danger. 

If you are with our kind friends when this reaches you, pray 


SIR GEORGE AND MISS SINCLAIR. 401 

offer to them my best regards. I am very sorry to hear of 
Mrs. M.’s*severe cold, but trust it will soon be relieved. 

God bless you, my beloved, and, 0 how devoutly longed-for, 
child. The sight of your dear portrait brings tears into my 
eyes, and makes the blood rush to my panting heart. 

Ever your MOST affectionate father, 

George Sinclair. 

I can add to the breathings of Sir George’s very soul, 
in the fervour of his affection for Miss Sinclair, as seen in 
the letters I have thus given, that he lias often, both in 
conversation and in writing, expressed himself to me 
to the same effect, and with an emotion which, as well 
as the words, showed how great the depth of that 
affection was. 

And it is due to Miss Sinclair to say that she was 
everything to him that he was to her. A daughter 
more devoted to a father never lived. To anticipate his 
wishes, to minister to his necessities, to contribute to his 
comfort, and to promote his happiness in every possible 
way, were the great objects for which she lived. And in 
her ardent desires to accomplish these, there was no 
self-sacrifice which she Avas not ever ready to make, 
and in making which she did not feel a special pleasure. 
For years they lived together,—often for weeks and 
months alone,—inexpressibly happy in each others 
society. 

And not only did Sir George and Miss Sinclair thus 
supremely enjoy each other’s society, but an atmosphere of 
happiness pervaded every part of Thurso Castle. All the 
servants were treated with the greatest kindness ; and the 
natural consequence Avas that they cherished a warm 
attachment to Sir George and Miss Sinclair. Sir George, 
of all men I ever kneAV, treated his own and other 




\G2 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


people’s servants in the kindest manner. He regarded 
them in the same light as that in which they are looked 
upon by the Great Creator and Preserver of the entire 
human race,—as being essentially equal with those who 
were by their position in life above them, though for a 
season filling, in the appointments of Providence, a sub¬ 
ordinate place in society. And just because they were 
occupying that position he most carefully consulted their 
feelings, and would not, on any account, or for any consi¬ 
deration, say or do a single thing which could cause them 
the slightest pain. I was exceedingly struck and no less 
gratified, at seeing Sir George, when the servants in 
Thurso Castle made their appearance in the breakfast- 
room, in answer to the summons to family prayers, make 
as respectful, and, let me add, as courteous a bow, when 
each servant entered the room, as if it had been to a 
prince or princess. I fancy I can even now, after the 
lapse of several years, see that kind, that courteous, and 
that polished bow. 

Though Sir George lived in seclusion so many years 
after his retirement from legislative life, that seclusion, 
in his case, was much more in name than reality. He 
had for the greater part of his time the presence of his 
daughter, which was preferable, in his view, to any 
other society; and he had his books, through means of 
which he could always hold converse with both the 
illustrious living and the dead. But he had still nobler 
occupations,— occupations which, while they ministered 
to his own enjoyment, contributed largely to relieve the 
sufferings and lessen the sorrows of the poor and needy. 
But on this point let me first lay before the reader the 
account which Miss Sinclair gives of Sir George s acts of 


SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S LABOURS AMONG THE POOR. 463 


kindness to the sons and daughters of bodily affliction, 
whatever form it assumed. The Dr. Turnbull men¬ 
tioned by Miss Sinclair, formerly of Russell, but now of 
Berkeley, Square, has been singularly successful in his 
mode of treatment of the various “ ills which flesh is heir 
to,” especially in cases of infirmity in hearing and seeing. 
In relation to deafness, he has lately had confided to him 
the treatment of two cases in the persons of princely 
patients,—members of the most distinguished royal 
families in Europe. The following is Miss Sinclair s 
account of 

SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S LABOURS AMONG THE SICK POOR. 

The great delight of Papa’s heart was that of relieving pain 
and assuaging sorrow. To visit the fatherless and widows in 
their affliction, was to him not merely a duty, but a pleasure; 
and in the severest weather he would walk over to Thurso, and 
visit from house to house,—with kind words and looks, and 
timely supplies of wine, which he carried about with him, for 
the sick and those who watched by them. His cordial greetings 
cheered the suffering. His real sympathy consoled the afflicted. 
His earnest prayers at the bedside of the dying,—in the house 
of mourning,—were the out-pourings of a heart which had been 
bruised in the innermost core, and had learnt sympathy through 
suffering. He did not merely feel for others; he felt with them. 
“ He wept with those who wept.” He could also rejoice with 
those who rejoiced ; for whenever a wedding took place at 
Thurso, Sir George was always ready with his usual gift of a 
white ribbon for the bonnet of the bride, and a leg of mutton 
for the wedding dinner: and many a home in the “ Fisher 
Biggins” has been brightened by his greetings and gifts on 
these occasions. 

To relieve physical pain was to him a labour of love. He 
had studied anatomy and chemistry under the Professors at 
Edinburgh. He subsequently became acquainted with Dr. 
Turnbull, of Russell Square, and was so much struck by his 
cures of blindness by the vapour of prussic acid, that he stayed 


404 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


for weeks in the house of the Doctor, in order to watch his 
cases, and be instructed in his modes of cure, so as to be enabled 
to do good at Thurso. It was from Dr. Turnbull that he learnt 
the value of the veratria ointment for the cure of rheumatic 
and neuralgic pains; and Sir George utilised this discovery of 
Dr. Turnbull’s for the benefit of hundreds of sufferers at Thurso, 
and from the country districts, who were brought to the Castle 
in carts, to be rubbed with “ Sir George’s ointment ” by his own 
hands. His first patient was his own daughter, who, after 
suffering from brow ague for six weeks, was cured by three 
successive applications of his invaluable ointment. For stiffness 
from rheumatism it acted like a charm, and the patients who 
resorted to Sir George’s spacious kitchen at Thurso Castle were 
almost always made more supple after an application of the 
ointment,—usually applied by Sir George with a brush, and the 
arm or leg, as the case might be, was afterwards held to the 
fire, and wrapped in flannel. The prussic acid vapour was put 
on a sponge in a bottle, with a glass fitting the eye, and held 
to it for a few minutes, and then removed, and then applied 
again. Its effect was to attenuate and gradually absorb films 
or specks from the pupil; and two girls at Thurso who were 
partially blind, from specks on their eyes left after small-pox, 
were, by persevering daily visits from Sir George, with the bottle 
of prussic acid repeatedly applied during three months, enabled 
to attend school and see to read. 

It gives me great pleasure to be able to say that I can, 
from personal knowledge, verify the correctness of this 
statement of Miss Sinclair. Both when on a visit some 
years ago at Thurso Castle, and afterwards when Sir 
George was staying at Torquay, in Devonshire, I accom¬ 
panied him in his visits to the poor and afflicted. 
And were 1 to live to a much longer period than the al¬ 
lotted term of human life,—even to double that term,— 
the remembrance of those visits would be as vivid as they 
were at the close of the days on which they took place. 
Sir George went, loaded with wine and other things best 



SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S LABOURS AMONG THE POOR. 4fi5 

fitted to nourish, the sick, to the houses of his numerous 
“ patients”; for he always called them by that name. On 
entering their humble abodes he proceeded to the chairs 
in which they were sitting, or the beds on which they 
were lying, as the case might be, and inquired of each in 
kind and sympathetic tones, how he or she was,—at the 
same time heartily shaking hands with them. He then 
took out the vessel which contained the wine which he 
always carried with him, and, after offering up a short 
prayer, put the wine to his lips, according to a traditional 
custom in that part of the country, and then gave it to the 
party visited. Afterwards came the medical appliances 
according to the nature of the case. No language could 
furnish any idea of the sense which was entertained of 
Sir George's kindness, by those who were thus the objects 
of his solicitude and his loving ministrations. They 
looked upon him as if he had been a being who had come 
from a higher sphere, to sympathise with them in their 
sorrows, and render them all the relief in his power in 
their circumstances and sufferings. Combined, I ought to 
mention, with his anxious endeavours to benefit them 
physically and socially, Sir George always sought to be a 
blessing spiritually to them ; and there can be no ques¬ 
tion that he was so in very many cases. I remember his 
telling me that on one occasion, on his handing a glass 
of wine, after a short prayer, to a poor afflicted man, 
remarking, as he presented it to him, that it would do 
him good, the sufferer replied, “ I have no doubt of that, 
Sir George, but I would rather have your prayers than 
the wine." 

So far my references to what I have seen and heard 
relate to Thurso; but on paying, on one occasion, a few 


H H 


4GG 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEOROE SINCLAIR, BART. 


days’ visit to Sir George at Torquay, I also accompanied 
him when going to see his patients there,—of whom he 
had no fewer than 100 in a day. On that occasion he 
was in ill-health, and though so feeble as to be unable to 
ascend without assistance the various steeps in that 
place, he would not be dissuaded from paying them his 
accustomed visit. As I assisted him to ascend and de¬ 
scend the various steep places in Torquay, I could not 
help being more forcibly struck than any one not seeing 
what I saw, nor knowing what I knew, could imagine,— 
with that almost supernatural sympathy which he felt for 
suffering humanity, and that self-sacrifice which he made 
to lessen the amount of the woe which is in the world. 
Let it be remembered, too, that Sir George’s merciful 
ministrations were not occasional only. They were not 
fitful; they were systematic wherever he was. And let 
me here remark, that he no sooner settled down for any 
length of time in any place, than he diligently sought 
out the suffering poor, with the view, and in the hope, of 
effecting a cure; or if that might not be, affording relief. 
To diminish the amount of human misery on the earth 
was indeed the great mission which he felt he had been 
called by Providence to fulfil during his sojourn in 
this lower sphere; and in the execution of that mission 
his whole heart was engaged. Nothing in the world— 
not even literature itself, much as he loved it—could 
divert him from his labours among the suffering poor. 
They were indeed, in the most enlarged acceptation of 
the phrase, labours of love. And in this high and holy 
calling, he had the supreme satisfaction of knowing that 
he was a co-worker with God Himself. 

It would be inferred, from what I have just said, even 





HIS MODESTY AND HUMILITY. 


4G7 


were I not to state the fact, that Sir George Sinclair was 
a man remarkable for his modesty. It was literally true 
of him—though true of very few—that he esteemed others 
better than himself. He never paraded his eminent 
intellectual gifts. He never made pretensions to mental 
superiority. Both in conversation and in writing he was 
one of the most unassuming of men. I have often been 
impressed with the fact of seeing a man of his rich intel¬ 
lectual culture deriving pleasure from the perusal of 
books of very inferior talent, and listening to preachers 
who had no pulpit gifts whatever, beyond, it might be, 
their personal piety. I remember that he and I went 
one Sunday into a small primitive looking Baptist 
Chapel in Torquay, containing fifty or sixty persons of 
the poorer class. The preacher, I have no doubt, was a 
good man, but illiterate, and possessed of no qualifications 
whatever for the pulpit. Yet Sir George listened to him 
with as great attention as if he had been a Dr. Chalmers 
or a Robert Hal], or the most eloquent and able 
preacher of the present day. 

The modesty and humility of Sir George were 
habitually manifested in the mode in which he con¬ 
ducted family worship. His words, his manner, every 
thing about him, showed how very humble his own 
opinion of himself was. His invariable practice was to 
begin family worship by supplicating the Divine direction 
and blessing on the exercises in which the household 
were about to engage. He next read a portion of 
Scripture, and gave a brief but interesting and edifying 
exposition of what he had read. This was followed by a 
prayer remarkable for the spirituality of tone which 
characterised every sentence. Sir George always con- 

H H 2 



4G8 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


eluded his prayers with the appropriate petition, that 
God would be pleased to hear the united supplications of 
the household “ in the name and for the sake of Him 
whom Thou hearest always.” 

In thus adverting to Sir George’s religious exercises in 
the family as the result of his personal religious opinions, 
I feel it right to make a momentary allusion to his 
spiritual experiences at particular periods of his life. At 
times he was not free from perplexities and painful 
feelings in regard to the moral government of God. One 
who knew all Sir George’s religious views and feelings 
better than any one else, thus writes to me on that 
subject:—“The ways of Providence sometimes perplexed 
him, but he finally recognised the truth that we hoav see 
darkly as through a glass, and that these riddles would 
be solved hereafter, and God justified when He spoke 
and clear when He judged; but- at times his faith was 
clouded, and the prosperity of the wicked, and the pre¬ 
ponderating mass of evil and suffering in the world, 
perplexed him sorely and disquieted his spirit, for he took 
to heart the sins and sufferings of others, and their lack 
of advantages and good moral influences, and his heart 
was full of pity even for the outcasts of society, whom 
he always regarded as objects of compassion.” 

In relation to Sir George’s religious perplexities, I 
have had private conversations with him, and can in 
consequence make some observations in addition to the 
above, on the subject. But first let me remark that 
nearly all the most eminent saints that ever lived have 
been perplexed and pained at seeing the wicked so often 
prosperous, while the most pious of men have been 
doomed all through life to be the subjects of unceasing 



OCCASIONAL RELIGIOUS PERPLEXITIES. 409 

suffering and sorrow. The Psalmist used, on occasions, 
to he staggered and harassed because of the difficulty 
which he felt in his attempts to reconcile the wisdom, 
the goodness, and the power of God, with the mode in 
which the moral government of the world is administered; 
but when he went into the sanctuary, his doubts were 
dissolved, and his perplexities made plain. And to those 
who believe in a future state there ought to be no diffi¬ 
culty in the matter, because we are assured that all 
mysteries will then be explained, and “the ways of God 
be justified to man.” I remember on one occasion Sir 
George reading a passage to me from the works of the 
Pev. Dr. Payson,—one of the most eminent of American 
divines,—from which he derived great comfort. 1 do 
not remember the words, but it was to this effect,—that 
while he laughed to scorn, as being weakness itself, the 
arguments of atheists and infidels of every class, against 
the Pfible, he was conscious of and deeply deplored the 
atheism of his own heart; “ and yet,” added Payson, “ I 
cannot help praying to God, and in that way I get rid of 
my perplexities.” That was the experience of Sir George 
Sinclair. He never permitted a day to pass without 
private prayer, as well as worship twice each day at the 
family altar. 

Sir George Sinclair used to say things in a few words 
which made an impression never to be erased from the 
memory, and which conveyed more meaning than an 
hour’s sermon, or a moderately-sized volume would have 
clone. In his epigrammatic sentences, whether in writing 
or in conversation, there was usually a point which at 
once struck the hearer or the reader with an effect which 
was electrical. I may mention in illustration of this 




470 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


what he once said of the brothers, Robert and James 
Haldane, two of the most excellent and venerated men 
in Scotland fifty or sixty years ago,—names indeed which 
were then household words, and whose memories are not 
only still fresh throughout the whole of that country, 
but will be so for generations to come, because of their 
high characters, and the incalculable amount of practical 
good they had been made, in the hands of Providence, the 
means of doing. In referring on one occasion to these 
two remarkable men, after having read their eminently 
interesting and instructive Memoirs, by Mr. A. Hal¬ 
dane, son of Mr. James Haldane, Sir George said, “ I 
would rather have read a narrative of their lives than 
seen the pyramids of Egypt. The characters of two such 
Christians are far more valuable and interesting than 
those gigantic brick and mortar repositories where for¬ 
gotten tyrants lie entombed.” On another occasion, 
writing to an author who had published a book in oppo¬ 
sition to what is called the Millenarian theory,—that 
is, that Christ is to come and reign personally on earth 
for a thousand years,—Sir George summed up his high 
commendation of the book as follows:—“ In short, it 
would take all the Millenarians in the world a whole 
Millennium to answer your book, and even then they 
would not have succeeded.” 

The society of Sir George Sinclair was eminently at¬ 
tractive and interesting. There was not only no subject 
with which he was not conversant, but none about which 
his conversation was not at once most delightful and in- 
structive. He had a great number of anecdotes always 
ready to illustrate and enliven every subject which was 
introduced either by himself or others. I intended to 






A TOUCHING INCIDENT. 


471 


liave given a number of these, but the rigour of biblio- 
polic exigences forbids my claiming the requisite space. 

Some little incidents occurred in Sir George’s history 
which touchingly illustrated the singular simplicity of 
his character, mingled with a warm-heartedness whicli 
has never been surpassed. On his return from Cannes, 
and when on his way through London to Thurso 
Castle, he called to see one of his friends, living in the 
neighbourhood of Russell Square. He found his friend 
had gone out, and his family did not know whether he 
would return before Sir George would have to leave 
for the London and North-Western railway-station. He 
expressed himself greatly disappointed at this, but just 
while in the act of giving utterance to his regret he saw 
his friend passing the window, when he clapped his hands, 
and exclaimed, “ Here he comes. Hurrah! hurrah ! 
hurrah ! ” with as much simplicity and as much warm¬ 
heartedness as he would have shown when in his teens 
at Harrow. There were several ladies—some of them 
strangers to Sir George—in the room at the time, and 
they were deeply touched at the incident. It was a 
final meeting and a final parting in this world between 
that friend and himself. His friend never heard his 
voice again,—never saw his face any more,—a circum¬ 
stance which clothed the simple incident with a double, 
interest. 




CHAPTER XIX. 


Break down in Sir George Sinclair’s Health—His Visit to Cannes in the Hope 
of its Restoration—Return to his own Country—His Continued Illness— 
His Death and Funeral—Lines on his Death. 

I come now to the last scene of all; and I do so with 
feelings of sadness too deep for language to express. But 
instead of writing all that portion of Sir George’s biogra¬ 
phy myself, I have delegated the mournful duty to one who 
alone is qualified for its due discharge. Miss Sinclair has 
furnished me with a clear and comprehensive narrative of 
the latter part of her father’s life, which is so accurate as 
well as ample in its details as to supersede the necessity 
of any remarks either from myself or from any one else. 
The following is Miss Sinclair’s account of her father’s 
last illness and death, given under the heading— 

BREAK DOWN IN HEALTH. 

In the spring of 1867, after passing a quiet winter at 
Thurso Castle with me, he left his home to visit his only 
son at Norwood. In the month of May, he was seized with 
bronchitis, and after a severe illness of some weeks, he consulted 
Dr. Williams, of London, who advised him to spend the next 
winter at Cannes. Accordingly, in November, 1867, lie crossed 
the Channel, stopping some days at Paris, in order that he might 
have personal intercourse with his correspondent of some years’ 
standing, the distinguished Berryer. Their Legitimist sympa¬ 
thies had drawn them together, and their meeting was a very 
cordial one. Both were courteous gentlemen of the ancien 
regime, and their views were identical. Papa’s health did 



BREAK-DOWN IN 'SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR’S HEALTH. 


473 


not improve at Cannes. Feeble action of the heart, and dis¬ 
tressing sleeplessness, kept him very low. The air was too 
exciting. He was eager to return to Thurso Castle, where his 
heart and sympathies were, and he grudged time and money 
spent away from his home. On arriving at the residence of his 
brother-in-law (Ham House, Richmond), he was taken ill with 
palpitations of the heart and fits of breathlessness, which came 
on every morning as he rose, and were most distressing. He 
would rush into the open air to get breath, and would sit for 
hours on the shady terraces inhaling the air and reading his 
favourite books. 

Early in July he recovered sufficiently to begin his long 
journey to Thurso Castle,—making a halt at the home of his 
widowed daughter in Dumfries-sliire, and another at the house of 
Mr. Greig in Perthshire, and then proceeding by rail to Golspie, 
where the carriage met him and conveyed him to his loved 
home. His health and spirits seemed to revive at first, and 
he regained the power of sleeping: but this was but a short 
revival. He had eagerly looked forward to laying the foun¬ 
dation of the new Free Church at Thurso, and was very anxious 
to be equal to the occasion ; but when the day came, he was 
overpowered with physical weakness, from the increased feeble¬ 
ness of the action of the heart; and though he had intended to 
speak at great length, he was reluctantly compelled to cut short 
his observations. Every one remarked how feeble he-was. This 
was his last appearance in public. A drive, taken on a cold day, 
brought on an attack of bronchitis, which, in addition to the 
irregular action of the heart, caused him great distress. For 
ten weeks he could only obtain snatches of sleep in a sitting 
posture. At one stage he had nearly recovered, but a relapse, 
on his 78th birthday, induced him to wish to bid his son 
farewell, and he was summoned from Cannes by telegraph. 

A few days after this, he started in his own carriage for 
Golspie, accompanied by his attached friend and medical atten¬ 
dant, Hr. Mill. At first the journey seemed to do him good, 
and he slept a great deal in the carriage, but was wakeful and 
distressed all night; and told Hr. Mill, in the morning, to wish 
all his friends at Thurso a kind farewell, as he did not expect 
to return alive. 


474 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


After a few clays’ halt in Perthshire, he proceeded to Edin¬ 
burgh, where the symptoms became more critical. The day 
before his departure, all trace of suffering had fled from his 
countenance, which looked radiant, and he seemed half his age. 
He prayed fervently and aloud, for himself and others, when his 
strength seemed hardly equal to the exertion; and his prayers, 
or rather out-pourings of the heart, astonished all who listened 
to him. Without any apparent struggle, the links were gently 
loosened,—he retaining consciousness to the last, and blessing 
his grandson about five minutes before he was withdrawn from 
this life, which event took place on October 23, 1808, in the 
78th year of his age. His daily prayer for years,—that I should 
close his eyes, was granted, and he turned a loving farewell 
look on me as his spirit was departing. 

His remains were conveyed to Thurso by sea; and when the 
coffin was carried to Thurso Castle, it was accompanied by a 
crowd of weeping women and children. All felt they had lost 
a father in his “ dear Honour.” 

The day of the funeral, a large concourse of mourners 
assembled at the Castle, including all the poor who were able 
to walk so far; and the coffin was carried outside, with an 
inscription attached to it, in Sir George’s handwriting, ex¬ 
pressive of his wish to be buried at Harold’s Tower. Many 
surrounded the coffin, and shed tears over it. There was a 
solemn silence as it was carried through the gateway, and all 
felt that the old Castle had lost its brightest ornament. On 
reaching Harold’s Tower there was a pause, and the coffin was 
supported, while an affecting prayer was given by the Rev. 
David Burn. It was then laid side by side with that of his wife. 
The crowd did not disperse for some time, as they lingered 
around the spot, dwelling on the innumerable acts of Christian 
sympathy and kindness they had received from the departed. 
His photographs were eagerly bought by all who could scrape 
a few pence together; and those who could not afford to pur¬ 
chase them, were urgent in asking for them as a remembrance 
of “ his dear Honour,” whose best monument is in the affections 
of the people of Thurso. 

Miss Sinclair has adverted to the deep and universal 


LINES ON THE DEATH OF SIR GEORGE. 


475 


sorrow which, was felt throughout Caithness on receiving 
intelligence of the death of Sir George, and that which 
was shown at his funeral. Lines were written to his 
memory from various quarters, but I can only give those 
which proceeded from the pen of Mr. F. W. Croly, son 
of his much esteemed friend, the late Dr. Croly. 

THE LATE SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

“ I will remember him when I make up my jewels.” 

Weep not for him—his griefs are o’er— 

His task complete—his warfare done ; 

He stands upon the blessed shore, 

His crown of deathless glory won. 

Weep not for him—the meek but sage— 

Who every path of duty trod ; 

And still from youth to reverend age, 

Like sainted Enoch, “ walked with God.” 

Improving still the flying hours 
While travelling on through life’s long way ! 

From every stage he culled the flowers. 

And threw the noxious weeds away, 

The artless truth of childhood’s time, 

With all youth’s generous warmth he joined ; 

The constancy of manhood’s prime, 

With age’s calm and heaven-tuned mind. 

Ilis, too, was learning’s boundless store, 

And airy Fancy’s genial play, 

And taste refined, and varied lore, 

To wile the social hour away. 

Weep not for him, his honoured tomb 
Holds but the dust, the mortal clay ; 

The casket lies, a thing of gloom, 

For angels bear the gem away. 

When He who once our sorrows bore ; 

"Who lived, who toiled, who died to save, 

Returns a pilgrim faint no more, 

But Lord of all,—e’en of the grave, 

Such jewels of celestial ray, 

Shall be to men and angels known, 

And shine, though earth and Heaven decay, 

Like stars in the Redeemer’s crown. 

F. W. C. 


Oct. 1868. 


47(j MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

But it was not in the form of private poetry alone 
that ^expression was given to the profound regret at the 
death of Sir George Sinclair, mingled with the highest 
eulogiums on his character and his great intellectual 
gifts. There was not a public journal in the whole of the 
North of Scotland that did not devote a greater or less 
amount of its space to a sketch of his eminently useful 
career. Some of them, indeed,—especially the local 
ones—devoted several columns to a narrative of the 
principal events in his history which occurred during his 
prolonged life. Nor did any journal of note in Scotland, 
so far as I am aware, fail to record the deatli of Sir 
George Sinclair, blended, in almost every instance, with 
some tributory sentences to his memory. The Times 
gave a somewhat lengthened notice of his death, with 
a gratifying tribute to his character; while the Record , 
the leading journal in the religious world, devoted nearly 
two columns of its space to a sketch of his career and an 
estimate of his character. The latter able article on the 
life and death of Sir George was evidently written by one 
who knew him intimately, and could duly appreciate the 
eminent and varied merits, both intellectually and re¬ 
ligiously, of the admirable man whose character he so 
faithfully and felicitously pourtrayed. 




CHAPTER XX. 


Thurso Castle—Harold’s Tower—A Tribute to the Memory of Sir George 
Sinclair—Successor in the Title and Estates. 

As Thurso Castle lias long been the family seat of the 
Sinclairs of Ulbster—as Sir George lived the greater part 
of his life in that mansion—and as the closing scene 
was within its walls, I feel assured that the readers of 
this work will peruse with interest the following sketch 
of Sir George’s residence, written by a pen most compe¬ 
tent for the task. 

SKETCH OF THURSO CASTLE. 

This fine old family seat is romantically situated on the edge 
of a rocky bank, above the sea, where the beautiful bay of 
Thurso begins to expand towards the ocean and the Orkney 
Islands. There is a not very ancient recollection of Captain 
Campbell, of the Barealdine family, grandson of the then Laird 
of Ulbster, having fished out of the window ; but there is no 
record whether the bag was filled. 

Since then, the Castle may be said to have encroached upon 
the sea, inasmuch as there has been inserted a very solid em¬ 
bankment, which gives a handsome terrace where there had 
been shore before. 

The Castle was built soon after the Restoration, about 166G, by 
George Sinclair, sixth Earl of Caithness, who ruined the family, 
and might have succeeded fairly to the title of a disinherited 
predecessor, who was called William the Waster. 

It is calculated that he was in debt a million of marks,—an 
immense sum in those days. His financial position may remind 
us of the Cardinal de Rohan’s exclamation, on hearing of the 




478 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


failure of his nephew, the Prince Guemene, who broke for some 
millions : “Ah ! that is a bankruptcy worthy of a Rohan ! ” 

This Earl had not the arbitrary power which, on a similar 
occasion, the neighbouring Earl of Orkney had employed, of 
forcing the people to work for nothing. It was then a handsome 
Castle, though since, in modern times, much enlarged and 
embellished. It is remarkable that there should be so much 
similarity in the rare succession of the Kings of France and the 
Earls of Caithness. King Louis XIV. was succeeded by his 
great grandson, Louis XV., and he by his grandson, Louis XVI.; 
—George, fourth Earl of Caithness, was succeeded by his great 
grandson George, fifth Earl, and he by his grandson George, 
sixth Earl: and there the royal and noble lines both ended. 
He had no children by his wife, Lady Mary Campbell, daughter 
of the Marquis of Argyll. 

On the death of George, sixth Earl, without issue, his affairs 
were irretrievably involved. Sir John Campbell of Glenorchy 
had been living with him and his cousin, the Countess, and 
had assisted him with large sums,—so that he was his principal 
creditor. He proceeded at once to claim everything. He mar¬ 
ried the widow, foreclosed the mortgages, took possession of the 
estates,—and got the King, Charles the Second, without enquiry, 
to create him Earl of Caithness. But the Sinclairs did not 
tamely submit to this usurpation. A cousin of the last Earl, 
the nearest heir male, got a favourable hearing of his case from 
James, Duke of York—then ruling in Edinburgh. He had a 
recognition of his right to the title, which w r as taken from the 
intruder; and he was obliged to have his style changed to Earl 
of Breadalbane and Holland. He defeated the Sinclairs in 
battle, when it was said—“ The Campbells are coming; the 
Sinclairs are running; 57 but ultimately he found he could not 
hold the property against such inveterate hostility. Thus this 
too clever Earl was baffled. His character is strikingly given 
in the Memoirs written by Mackay, about 1705, to enlighten 
Sophia, Electress of Hanover, as to whom she would have to 
rule over, in case she lived to succeed her cousin, Queen Anne, 
on the throne of Great Britain and Ireland. He is declared to 
have been “ cunning as a fox, wise as a serpent, and slippery as 
an eel.” He was the principal concoctor of the massacre of 


THURSO CASTLE. 


470 


Glencoe, and refused to account for the 10,000k he got to pacify 
the Highlands,—saying, “The Highlands are quiet, and the 
money is spent. ’ He sold the whole property to two gentlemen 
of the name of Sinclair; one was Sir James Sinclair of Dun- 
beath, the other, John Sinclair of Ulbster : and as Sir James 
did not keep his share long, it fell, also, in great part, to the 
Laird of Ulbster, who had the Castle in the first division. The 
family of Ulbster have ever since, for a century and a half, 
possessed the Castle and a great portion of the estate, and have 
frequently represented the county in Parliament. The family 



soon attained to great consideration,—first, in George Sinclair 
of Ulbster, whose character stood very high, and who married 
Janet, sister of William, eighteenth Earl of Sutherland. They 
were the parents of the late Right Honourable Sir John Sinclair 
of Ulbster, Baronet, who added so much lustre to the family, 
and so much extent and effect to the mansion. 

But as no letter-press description of any material ob¬ 
ject, however graphic that description maybe, can convey 



































480 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


to the mind so vivid an idea of the thing described, as a 
pictorial representation, I give an engraving, prepared for 
this volume, of an edifice with which there are so many 
interesting traditions associated as Thurso Castle. 

O 

It will also be interesting to many to learn a few par¬ 
ticulars respecting “ Harold’s Tower,” the place in which 
the remains of Sir George were interred, as those of Lady 
Camilla had been five years before. It possesses a place 
in the history of Caithness, as will be seen by the fol¬ 
lowing account of it, which was given by a friend of 
the late Sir John Sinclair, the father of Sir George, in 
the twentieth volume of his “ Statistical Account of 
Scotland.” 

SKETCH OF HAROLD’S TOWER. 

Not far from Thurso Castle stands Harold’s Tower, a modem 
building erected by the late Right Honourable Sir John Sinclair, 
both for the sake of ornament to the country, and of utility as 
a sea-mark. The idea of this building was first suggested to 
my father by an eccentric antiquary, Alexander Pope, minister 
of Reay. This old gentleman had witnessed with horror the 
sacrilegious spoliation of an ancient chapel, the burying-place of 
Harold, Earl of Caithness, who had fallen in battle fighting 
against Norwegian invaders. The minister presented a petition 
in the name of the fallen chief, craving protection for his 
remains, and animadverting on the negligence which had 
allowed his mausoleum to be pulled to pieces, and its fragments 
profanely built into inclosures for the surrounding fields. The 
following is the curious document here referred to :— 

“ Know, sir, that I was slain in battle, about the year 1190, 
near your park of Kirkwall, which has its denomination from 
an elegant chapel built above my grave in the said park. The 
stones of my chapel are now carried away and built in your 
inclosures about that ground. I had once a right to the half of 
Orkney and Zetland from the King of Norway, and a right to 
the half of Caithness from King William, the Lyon of Scotland ; 


TRIBUTE TO HIS MEMORY. 


481 


I had also an estate in Sutherland, where I was born. I lost 
my life in battle endeavouring to recover my property, as 
became a nobleman of spirit, out of the hands of a cruel and 
daring tyrant, justly called Wicked Earle Harolde, who died 
ingloriously thereafter, being hanged by order of King William, 
the Lyon, who marched into Caithness at the head of a gallant 
army to chastise that daring and bloody tyrant in the year 1196. 

“Be pleased to inclose my grave in a decent manner, so as 
not to become the resting-place of animals, or to have my 
remains ploughed up. My grave is now all my estate, which 
ought to be held inviolable. By so doing, you will show a 
noble example to others to honour the memory of the brave. 
Though unfortunate, you make restitution, as the stones of my 
chapel are built in your inclosures, you give a caution to others 
not to violate the sepulchre of the dead; and it will yield you 
the most manly and sensible pleasure to have done an action 
commendable in itself, and which will perpetuate your memory 
to posterity.” 

In consequence of this application, Sir John was tempted to 
erect a monument to Earl Harold, which has proved a consider¬ 
able ornament to the neighbourhood. 

And now a few words from myself: for I could not 
permit the grave to close on the earthly remains of 
Sir George Sinclair without a parting tribute to his 
transcendant moral worth. Now that he “is no more 
in the world,” all who had the high and happy privilege 
to know him intimately, will cherish, till the last moment 
of their existence, the warmest regard for his memory, 
and a most affectionate remembrance of his brilliant and 
eminently useful life. Few of us, probably none, may be 
endowed with the intellectual gifts which lie possessed in 
such rare abundance, and therefore, in that respect, cannot 
tread in his steps; but we may all seek to be emula¬ 
tors of him as a Christian and a philanthropist,—as one 
whose great mission he felt it to be to do good to the 



482 MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 

souls and bodies of Ills fellow men, and of whom it 
may be said, in the most literal and comprehensive import 
of the terms, that he was never wearied in well-doing. 
To ameliorate the condition of suffering humanity, 
whatever form that suffering assumed, was Sir George 
Sinclair’s meat and drink,—the end for which he lived, 
—the object which he unceasingly sought to accomplish ; 
and that too often when in such a state of physical 
ill-health, and weighed down by the pressure of mental 
anxiety, that he stood himself as much in need of rest, 
both in body and mind, as those sorrowing and suffering 
fellow creatures to whose spiritual necessities and physical 
exigencies it was the great and uniform aim of his life 
to minister. So sincere, indeed, and absorbing was his 
sympathy for the sons' and daughters of affliction, no 
matter under what circumstances brought before him, 
that he practically made their sorrows and sufferings 
his own. Of him it was emphatically true, that he wept 
with those that wept. He frequently forgot his own 
troubles, however great, in theirs. His philanthropy, too, 
was world-wide in its range of objects. It embraced the 
whole of our race. Wherever he saw or heard of human 
misery, thither his heart was borne, as on the wings of 
the morning, in sincerest sympathy with their sorrows 
and sufferings. The great, oft-times, indeed, the sole 
source of whatever happiness he enjoyed, was the reflec¬ 
tion that he had done what he could to lessen the amount 
of human woe in the world. His was no mere sentimental 
or theoretical philanthropy : it was thoroughly practical. 
He denied himself those luxuries of life which are com¬ 
mon in the case of one in his social position, in order that 
he might minister to those who, in the appointments of 



TRIBUTE TO HIS MEMORY. 


483 


Providence, were plunged into the depths of destitution 
and distress. Had it been within the pale of possibility, 
there was not a suffering or sorrowing; fellow-creature in 
any part of our globe, whose wants he would not have 
relieved, whose sorrows he would not have assuaged. 
And whatever Sir George thus did to ameliorate the 
condition of humanity, he did without ostentation. So 
far from parading his works of compassion and mercy to 
the miserable he sought to conceal them from the world. 

O 

So far from seeking fame by his good deeds, the con¬ 
sciousness that he had lessened in any degree the sum of 
human misery was to him an ample reward. But words 
would fail me in the endeavour to sketch the character 
of Sir George Sinclair as a philanthropist. Taking him 
all in all,—viewing him intellectually, socially, morally, 
and religiously, in conjunction,—I unhesitatingly say,- 
that I have never before seen his like, nor do I ever 
expect to see his like again. What was said of the 
Saviour of mankind might, with great truth, though 
necessarily in a subordinate sense, be said of him, “ He 
went about doing good/' That indeed would have been 
a most appropriate inscription for his tomb. His memory 
will live in the admiring minds of generations yet to 
come, as well as in the grateful hearts of multitudes 
who have been the recipients of his sympathy, and the 
subjects of his merciful ministrations during his sojourn 
on earth. For myself, I will simply say that I shall ever 
cherish with a special pleasure the remembrance of the 
many happy hours during a prolonged friendship which I 
have spent in his society. And I feel I may with all con¬ 
fidence add, that there is not one of his many surviving 
intimate friends who will not employ the same language 




484 


MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR, BART. 


in relation to themselves. It was indeed a privilege of 
a high—I might say of a holy nature, to have possessed 
the friendship and to have enjoyed the society of the good 
and gifted man to whose Life and Labours I have devoted 
the preceding pages. 

Sir George Sinclair is succeeded in the title and 
estates by his son, John George Tollemache, who married, 
in 1853, the eldest daughter of William Standish 
Standish, Esq., of Duxbury Park, Lancashire, and 
Cocker Hall, Durham. Sir Tollemache was elected 
M.P. for the county of Caithness in August last, after 
a severe contest. His triumph over his opponent was 
a signal one, and was hailed as such throughout the 
whole of the North of Scotland. Sir Tollemache Sin¬ 
clair is a man of great ability, thoroughly conversant 
with matters of business, and will, I feel assured, prove 
an accession to our Legislative Council when dealing with 
the great practical questions of the day. 


THE END. 


BRADBURY, EYANS, AND CO., PRINTERS, WHITE FRIARS. 


TINSLEYS’ MAGAZINE, 

An Illustrated Monthly , price One Shilling , 

CONTAINS : 

GEORGE CANTERBURY’S WILL. A Serial Story. By 

Mrs. Henry Wood, author of “ East Lynne,” &c. 

AUSTIN FRIARS. By tlio Author of 66 George Geith,” 

&c., &c., &c. 


TINSLEY BROTHERS’ NEW BOOKS, 

AT ALL LIBRARIES. 


TRA\ ELS IN CENTRAL AFRICA, and Exploration of 

the Western Nile Tributaries. By Mr. aiul Mrs. Petherick. With Maps, 
Portraits, and numerous Illustrations. 2 vols. 8vo, ‘15s. 

THE BATTLE-FIELDS OF THE PARAGUAYAN WAR. 

By Captain Richard F. Burton, author of “A Mission to Dahome,” &c. 
2 vols. 8vo. With Map and Illustrations. 

MEMOIRS OF SIR GEORGE SINCLAIR. By James 

Grant. Svo.. 

PLACES AND PEOPLE : being Studies from the Life. By 

J. C. Parkinson. 1 vol. 7s. 6 d. 

ROME AND VENICE, with other Wanderings in Italy, in 

1866-7. By George Augustus Sal a. 1 vol. 8vo. 

THE ENCHANTED TOASTING-FORK: a Fairy Tale. By 

the Author of “Out of the Meshes.” Profusely Illustrated and handsomely 
bound. 5 s . 

%* A handsome Christmas Present for Children. 

THE ROSE OF JERICHO. Translated from the French. 

Edited by the Hon. Mrs. Norton. 25. Qd . 

PEASANT LIFE IN SWEDEN. By L. Lloyd. Svo. 

With Illustrations. 

THE HISTORY OF GAMING. Byx4. Steinmetz. 2 vols. 

Svo. 

EXPLORATIONS OF THE HIGHLANDS OF THE 

BRAZIL ; with a full Account of the Gold and Diamond Mines ; also 
Canoeing down Fifteen Hundred Miles of the great River Sao Francisco from 
Sahara to the Sea. By Captain Richard F. Burton, F.R.G.S., &c. 2 vols. 

Svo, with Maps and Illustrations, 805. 

THE LIFE OF EDMUND KEAN. From various Pub¬ 

lished and Original Sources. By F. W. Hawkins. 2 vols. 8vo. 305. 


TI NSLEY BROTHERS, 18, CATHERINE STREET, STRAND. 








TINSLEY BROTHERS’ NEW 


NOVELS. 


STRONG HANDS AND STEADFAST HEARTS. A Novel 

By tlie Countess Yon Bothmer. 3 vols. 

THE LILY AND THE ROSE. A Tale of the Untruth o: 

a True Heart. By Gabriel H. Harwood. 3 vols. 

HEATHFIELD HALL; or Prefatory Life. A Youthfu 

Beminiscence. By Hans Sciireiber, Author of “ Nicknames at the Play 
ingfielcl College,” &c. With cm Illustration. 

PHCEBE’S MOTHER, A Hovel. By Louisa Anne Mere¬ 
dith, Author of “My Bush Friends in Tasmania.” 2 vols. 

WEE WIFIE. A Hovel. By Rosa Houchette Carey 

Author of “ Nellie’s Memories.” 3 vols. 

OBEROH SPELL. A Hovel. By Eden St. Leonards 

3 vols. i 

DAISLETS DREAM. By tlie Author of u Recommended t< 

Mercy,” &c. 3 vols. Second Edition. 

BEHEATIT THE WHEELS. By the Author of u 01iv< 

Yarcoe,” “ Simple as a Dove,” &c. 3 vols. 

THE BAROHET’S SUHBEAM. A Hovel. By Mrs 

Wiieeley, 3 vols. 

YALEHTIHE FORDE. By Cecil Griffith, Author o: 

“ Victory Deane,” “ Maud Maimvaring,” &c. 3 vols. 


TINSLEY BROTHERS’ 

TWO-SHILLING EDITIONS OF POPULAR NOVELS, 


To be had of all Booksellers , and at every Baihuay Stall in the Kingdom . 


DE. BEADY. 

RECOMMENDED TO MEECY. 
THE SAYAGE-CLUB PAPERS. 
THE ROCK AHEAD. 

THE PRETTY WIDOW. 

MISS FORRESTER. 

SANS MERCI. 

NOT WISELY, BUT TOO WELL. 


BRAKESPEARE. 

MAURICE DERING. 

THE WATERDALE NEIGHBOURS. 
BLACK SHEEP. 

BARREN HONOUR, 

SWORD AND GOWN. 

THE DOWER HOUSE. 
EYERY-DAY PAPERS. 



TINSLEY BROTHERS, IS, CATHERINE STREET, STRAND. 
























































